Re: [PATCH] power_supply: only register tosa_battery driver on tosa

[Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>]

On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 07:41:47PM +0300, Dmitry wrote:
[...]
> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/power/tosa_battery.c b/drivers/power/tosa_battery.c
> >> >> index 2eab35a..4e52c22 100644
> >> >> --- a/drivers/power/tosa_battery.c
> >> >> +++ b/drivers/power/tosa_battery.c
> >> >> @@ -469,6 +469,9 @@ static struct platform_driver tosa_bat_driver = {
> >> >>
> >> >>  static int __init tosa_bat_init(void)
> >> >>  {
> >> >> +     if (!machine_is_tosa())
> >> >> +             return -EINVAL;
> >> >> +
> >> >
> >> > I tend to reject this approach. You should rename the driver instead.
> >> >
> >> > I.e.
> >> > -.driver.name    = "wm97xx-battery",
> >> > -.driver.name    = "tosa-battery",
> >> >
> >> > And make sure that this won't break users of that driver (though
> >> > I don't see any).
> >>
> >> The wm97xx-battery device is registered by
> >> drivers/input/toucscreen/wm97xx-core.c
> >
> > Hmm.. So you can't rename the tosa driver, because then it won't
> > work, correct?
> 
> Yup.
> I see few ways to resolve this:
> * write better wm97xx interface. Dunno if that is feasible or possible.
>   One of the possible solutions is to pass battery and ts device names
>   and data from within board data via ac97 layer to wm97xx-core. This
>   will provide several benefits (e.g. then we can drop lots of parameters
>   from wm97xx-core, which are really board parameters).

That would be great indeed. But for now, just don't compile the two
drivers on the tosa platform. No need for machine_is_*() hacks...

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2