Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755204Ab2HGPpY (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2012 11:45:24 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:56590 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755086Ab2HGPpT (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2012 11:45:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 16:44:58 +0100 From: Russell King To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Mark Brown , Haojian Zhuang , sameo@linux.intel.com, rpurdie@rpsys.net, bryan.wu@canonical.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bergmann Arnd Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] mfd: replace IORESOURCE_IO by IORESOURCE_MEM Message-ID: <20120807154458.GK24257@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20120806220032.GD26698@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120807103851.GS16861@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120807111331.GC24257@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120807112844.GZ16861@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120807113121.GD24257@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120807113652.GA6282@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120807114556.GC16861@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120807115140.GH24257@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1288 Lines: 27 On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 05:22:45PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > And as Arnd pointed out, if resources will be used for various new buses, > "IORESOURCE_FOO" or "IORESOURCE_OTHER" is a bit vague. > What about conflicts where one driver means i2c addresses and another > one means gpio addresses? The resource system will reject them? I changed the subsequent patch to use IORESOURCE_REG - at least that better describes what it's for. Maybe IORESOURCE_REGRANGE would be better (so it can be used for any register range resource on any bus type) ? However, one issue that I hope has already been addressed is what space the ranges are in, and how does a sub-driver get to know that. To put it another way, how does a sub-driver get to know about the 'base' for these register ranges. I hope that problem has been thought about in MFD land _before_ the approach of passing around register ranges through resources was allowed to happen. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: -- 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/