Re: similar files: fusbh200-hcd.c and fotg210-hcd.c

[Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1479 bytes --]

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 03:14:50PM +0200, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote:
> >> Should these files be consolidated? And if so how?
> > if you can find an easy way, that would be a very, very welcome patch.
> 
> Is the ideal solution to consolidate both fusbh200-hcd.c and
> fotg210-hcd.c in a single module? If this is the case, how to detect
> at run time which version of the hw is present? Both are registered as

does it matter ? If they work the same way, why does it matter which
one's running?

> platform devices and I could not find an obvious way to detect the
> model at run time. I could successfully load fusbh200-hcd on my fedora

is there a revision register ? Or you may use different platform_device
names with platform_device_id table.

> notebook (hp elitebook 840), and on a VM, even if neither has the hw
> ($ sudo modprobe fusbh200-hcd). The module loads with the warning
> "fusbh200_hcd should always be loaded before uhci_hcd and ohci_hcd,
> not after". On another workstation running ubuntu, I could load both
> modules at the same time, producing the same warning for each module.
> Should the module load if the device is not present?
> 
> Other solution for consolidation would be to create a common_code.c,
> keeping both fusbh200-hcd.c and fotg210-hcd.c only with the code that
> differ. Is this better than what is there now?
> 
> Other ideas?

just combine them :-p Use platform_device_id to differentiate.

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]