Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932677Ab1CWL3J (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2011 07:29:09 -0400 Received: from linux-sh.org ([111.68.239.195]:45837 "EHLO linux-sh.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932501Ab1CWL3H (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2011 07:29:07 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:28:27 +0900 From: Paul Mundt To: Mark Brown Cc: Kay Sievers , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Greg KH , Linux PM mailing list , Russell King , Magnus Damm , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/10] sh: Use struct syscore_ops instead of sysdev class and sysdev Message-ID: <20110323112826.GB6008@linux-sh.org> References: <201103100131.58206.rjw@sisk.pl> <201103222130.46603.rjw@sisk.pl> <1300826390.1815.5.camel@zag> <201103222200.52131.rjw@sisk.pl> <1300828356.1815.15.camel@zag> <20110322214922.GA7503@linux-sh.org> <1300831256.1815.22.camel@zag> <20110322222347.GA3978@linux-sh.org> <20110323111220.GB27671@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110323111220.GB27671@sirena.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1529 Lines: 28 On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:12:20AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 07:23:48AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:00:56PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > > Which is what we need to get rid of. It does not make any sense on the > > > global picture to have anything like that exported to userspace. > > > So far I haven't heard any rationale for why it doesn't. Exporting CPU > > state to userspace certainly makes sense, and the sysdev model has worked > > reasonably for CPUs, memory nodes, etc. > > FWIW it'd be really helpful to have CPUs (or at least SoCs) be regular > struct devices for integration with the regulator API so we can have all > things that might use a regulator (like DVFS) be struct devices but... > Sure, that makes sense. The easiest would probably be to just replace the struct cpu sysdev with a struct device pointer and fix up drivers/base/cpu.c accordingly. The linux/cpu.h API is unfortunately rather coupled to the idea of having a sysdev, but this is purely for attributes and attribute groups and primarily impacts powerpc, so the conversion shouldn't be too painful. For simple topology registration the bulk of the architectures ultimately don't care what's backing the struct cpu within the sysfs context. -- 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/