On 06/18/2013 11:33 AM, J, KEERTHY wrote: > Stephen Warren wrote at Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:53 PM: ...>> No, you should just check the IRQ number. > > Hmmm...so something like (!i2c->irq)
Yes. >> Consider this: >> >> If the device was instantiated from a board file *or* a device tree, >> i2c->irq is correctly set. Hence, checking that value works in both >> cases. >> >> If you check the interrupts DT property, that will only work if the >> device was instantiated from device tree, and not if it was >> instantiated from a board file; the property will never exist in the >> board file case, and hence you'll never be able to have a board file >> provide an interrupt. > > The board file approach is getting deprecated for this. I > Myself removed board file related pdata stuff in one of the patches. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg90598.html > > So going the DeviceTree way. Even if you're 100% sure this driver will only ever work with DT (which seems like a bad assumption to make no matter what the circumstance), it'd still be best to detect whether an IRQ was specified in a generic way. That way, nobody will read this driver, assume the code is generic, and just copy/paste it without thinking. -- 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/
