Hi Arnd, On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 11:54:30AM +0800, Pratyush ANAND wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 11:37:05PM +0800, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thursday 06 February 2014, Pratyush Anand wrote: > >
[...] > > I think it's better to make this code table-driven. Rather than checking > > 'of_device_is_compatible()', it's much easier to add a .data field to > > the of_device_id array that describes the PHY. You can use .data to > > point to a structure containing per-device function pointers or > > (better) values and offsets to be used. values and offset would be good as long as we do not need to write on conditional read status. In our case its OK, as we do not need to write conditionally. But, would it be a good idea to go that way? Regards Pratyush > > Sounds a better idea. will reduce code size a lot. Thanks. > > Regards > Pratyush > > > > > Arnd -- 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/
