mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	John Williams <john.williams@petalogix.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>,
	devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hjk@linutronix.de, gregkh@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uio/pdrv_genirq: Add OF support
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 10:34:19 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110331163419.GH26709@ponder.secretlab.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D9486E4.9030006@monstr.eu>

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 03:51:32PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >On Thursday 31 March 2011, John Williams wrote:
> >>On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 02:30:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>Support OF support. "generic-uio" compatible property is used.
> >>>And exactly this was the issue last time (when I tried). This is a
> >>>generic property, which is linux-specific and not describing HW. The
> >>>agreement back then was to we probably need to add compatible-entries at
> >>>runtime (something like new_id for USB). So the uio-of-driver could be
> >>>matched against any device. Otherwise, we would collect a lot of
> >>>potential entries like "vendor,special-card1". Although I wonder
> >>>meanwhile if it is really going to be that bad; we don't have so much
> >>>UIO-driver in tree as well. Maybe worth a try?
> >>
> >>Maybe I misunderstand you, in my view it is the responsibility of
> >><vendor> to create their DTS files to indicate they want
> >><special-card1> to bind to generic-uio.
> >>
> >>So, no great list of compat strings should grow in the driver, but
> >>rather the user of the driver must make it happen.
> >>
> >>Am I missing something?
> >
> >We try to make the device tree on describe the present hardware,
> >but not relate to how it is used.
> >
> >There are certainly cases where a specific piece of hardware can
> >be used either by a kernel-only driver or the UIO driver with a
> >user backend. I would argue that you should be able to use an
> >identical device tree for both cases, because the hardware is
> >the same. Chosing which driver to use can be either in the realm
> >of the kernel, or even user policy.
> 
> ok. What about to keep of_device_id empty?  Then there is compatible
> property string and everybody can choose what wants.
> OF is just a different driver initialization method but it is in the
> same category which is supported right now which is initialization
> through platform_device structure.

I'm not completely sure I understand what you're suggesting here.
Yes, of_device_id can be left unpopulated, but then you need to make
sure another method is available for binding the driver.

hmmmm....

You could see if the manual 'bind/unbind' platform_bus sysfs
attributes would do the job for you (see drivers/base/bus.c).  You'd
need some mechanism to force the generic-uio driver to accept the
device.

g.


  reply	other threads:[~2011-03-31 16:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-31 12:29 UIO " Michal Simek
2011-03-31 12:30 ` [PATCH] uio/pdrv_genirq: Add " Michal Simek
2011-03-31 12:49   ` Wolfram Sang
2011-03-31 13:11     ` John Williams
2011-03-31 13:25       ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-03-31 13:51         ` Michal Simek
2011-03-31 16:34           ` Grant Likely [this message]
     [not found]     ` <AANLkTi=sG6oVNifwLLi8jjKQXjR6kXZx43NxtFfoPumy@mail.gmail.com>
2011-03-31 13:23       ` Wolfram Sang
2011-03-31 13:37         ` Michal Simek
2011-03-31 13:47         ` John Williams
2011-03-31 16:25           ` Grant Likely
2011-03-31 13:28     ` Michal Simek
2011-03-31 17:03       ` Hans J. Koch
2011-03-31 17:57         ` Michal Simek
2011-03-31 19:23           ` Hans J. Koch
2011-03-31 19:48             ` Grant Likely
2011-03-31 20:30               ` Hans J. Koch
2011-04-02 10:35                 ` Wolfram Sang
2011-04-04 17:04                   ` Hans J. Koch
2011-04-04 17:31                     ` Wolfram Sang
2011-04-04 18:24                       ` Hans J. Koch
2011-04-05  6:25                         ` Michal Simek
2011-04-05 11:50                           ` Hans J. Koch
2011-03-31 16:43   ` Grant Likely
2011-03-31 17:54     ` Michal Simek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110331163419.GH26709@ponder.secretlab.ca \
    --to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=hjk@linutronix.de \
    --cc=john.williams@petalogix.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
    --cc=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®