On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 07:53:03PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > I have the same objection as before: using platform device solely for > > the purpose of passing some data from board code to the driver. Surely > > there are other ways of passing this bit of data... What about, for > > example, making it an empty weak symbol so that board code could > > override it with strong one? > > I have the same objection to it being passed in other weird ways. This is > cross architecture, cross device stuff. Magic architecture goo and weak > symbols are not the right solution.
The right solution is module option + DT. However they want to have compatibility for older boards. For that I think weak symbol is just fine. > > The reset switch is a device, physically and logically. Except that this one isn't. It is a magic sequence of key presses done on a physical device that is already registered with the kernel. We do not register SysRQ itself as a separate device, we do not register Mac button mangler as a separate device, and I do not see the reason here either. Thanks. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
