Re: [PATCH v2] pps-gpio: add device-tree binding and support

2013-06-03 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 12:44:09 +0200 Jan Luebbe wrote: > Instead of allocating a struct pps_gpio_platform_data in the DT case, store > the necessary information in struct pps_gpio_device_data itself. This avoids > an additional allocation and the ifdef. It also gets rid of some indirection. > > Al

Re: [PATCH v2] pps-gpio: add device-tree binding and support

2013-06-03 Thread Rodolfo Giometti
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 12:44:09PM +0200, Jan Luebbe wrote: > Instead of allocating a struct pps_gpio_platform_data in the DT case, store > the necessary information in struct pps_gpio_device_data itself. This avoids > an additional allocation and the ifdef. It also gets rid of some indirection. >

Re: [PATCH v2] pps-gpio: add device-tree binding and support

2013-06-01 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Saturday 01 June 2013, Jan Luebbe wrote: > Instead of allocating a struct pps_gpio_platform_data in the DT case, store > the necessary information in struct pps_gpio_device_data itself. This avoids > an additional allocation and the ifdef. It also gets rid of some indirection. > > Also use dev_

[PATCH v2] pps-gpio: add device-tree binding and support

2013-06-01 Thread Jan Luebbe
Instead of allocating a struct pps_gpio_platform_data in the DT case, store the necessary information in struct pps_gpio_device_data itself. This avoids an additional allocation and the ifdef. It also gets rid of some indirection. Also use dev_err instead of pr_err in the changed code. Signed-off