On 7/25/05, Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 10:16:05AM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > If the problem is that you have a single piece of hardware you need to > > bind several drivers to - I guess you will have to create a new > > sub-device bus for that. Or just register sub-devices on the same bus > > the parent device is registered on - I am not sure what is best in > > this particular case - I am not familiar with the arch. > > That is exactly the problem - these kinds of devices do _not_ fit > well into the device model. A struct device for every different > possible sub-unit is completely overkill. > > For instance, you may logically use one ADC and some GPIO lines > on the device for X and something else for Y and they logically > end up in different drivers. > > The problem is that the parent doesn't actually know how many > devices to create nor what to call them, and they're logically > indistinguishable from each other so there's no logical naming > system. >
Then we should probably not try to force them into driver model. Have parent device register struct device and when sub-drivers register they could attach class devices (like input devices) directly to the "main" device thus hiding presence of sub-sections of the chip from sysfs completely. My point is that we should not be using class_interface here - its purpose is diferent. -- Dmitry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
