Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262196AbUKKIxB (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:53:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262200AbUKKIxB (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:53:01 -0500 Received: from fmr05.intel.com ([134.134.136.6]:22730 "EHLO hermes.jf.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262196AbUKKIwz (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:52:55 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 1/4]device core changes From: Li Shaohua To: Russell King Cc: Greg , ACPI-DEV , lkml , Len Brown , Patrick Mochel In-Reply-To: <20041111084411.A2400@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1099887071.1750.243.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <20041108225810.GB16197@kroah.com> <1099961418.15294.11.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <1099971341.15294.48.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <20041109045843.GA4849@kroah.com> <1099990981.15294.57.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <20041110012443.GA9496@kroah.com> <1100051137.7825.6.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <20041110042822.A13318@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <1100156613.8769.26.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <20041111084411.A2400@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1100162802.14842.0.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:46:42 +0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1757 Lines: 35 On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 16:44, Russell King wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 03:03:33PM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > > On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 12:28, Russell King wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 09:45:37AM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 09:24, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > Maybe your other patches weren't so bad... If we implement them, can we > > > > > drop the platform notify stuff? > > > > Currently only ARM use 'platform_notify', and we can easily convert it > > > > to use per-bus 'platform_bind'. One concern of per-bus 'platform_bind' > > > > is we will have many '#ifdef ..' if many platforms implement their > > > > per-bus 'platform_bind'. > > > > > > Except none of the merged ARM platforms use platform_notify, and I haven't > > > seen any suggestion in the ARM world of why it would be needed. > > Ok, let me summarize it. we now have two options: > > 1. using 'platform_notify' > > platform_notify only has one parameter 'struct device', we must know the > > exact bus type of a device. We can identify the bus type from its name > > (such as 'pci', 'ide'), but it's quite some ugly. Or we can add a 'type' > > flag in the 'struct bus_type' to indicate the exact bus type which Greg > > doesn't like it. One shortcoming is the method hasn't good flexibility, > > we must add a new type whenever a new bus type is added. > > Is there something wrong with doing dev->bus == &pci_bus_type for > example? It can't work if the bus type is in a loadable module. Thanks, Shaohua - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/