On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 21:20 +0800, Eric Miao wrote: > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Hein Tibosch <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Andy, Mika, > > > > On 8 Feb 2013, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > >> Some of the platform devices rely on the name of their driver to match > >> with. In > >> the current implementation, if platform id table is needed, they have to > >> add > >> the name to the platform id table which sounds alogical. The patch > >> adjustes the > >> logic of the id table matching to make sure we will fall-back to match by > >> the > >> driver name. This will make it similar to the DT or ACPI cases. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Reported-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Eric Miao <eric.miao@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/base/platform.c | 4 ++-- > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c > >> index c0b8df3..452ba4b 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/base/platform.c > >> +++ b/drivers/base/platform.c > >> @@ -732,8 +732,8 @@ static int platform_match(struct device *dev, struct > >> device_driver *drv) > >> return 1; > >> > >> /* Then try to match against the id table */ > >> - if (pdrv->id_table) > >> - return platform_match_id(pdrv->id_table, pdev) != NULL; > >> + if (pdrv->id_table && platform_match_id(pdrv->id_table, pdev)) > >> + return 1; > >> > >> /* fall-back to driver name match */ > >> return (strcmp(pdev->name, drv->name) == 0); > > > > When I upgraded an avr32 system from 3.8 to a recent next release, I found > > it was > > broken: DMA was not available because the dw_dma driver did not get probed > > anymore. > > > > The dw_dma driver does have a id_table, but the boards in arch/avr32 are > > still expecting > > driver identification by name. > > I think this is a different philosophy here. I'm actually fine with either. > The > questions are really: > > 1. will it be a bit inconsistent if the driver is using id_table, > while the device > is still using a legacy way?
Legacy way may be considered as a fall-back. > 2. instead of introducing a different logic in the platform driver core code, > is it possible this could be fixed at the board level? It might be fixed in the driver, though I think that is ugly approach, by adding name of the driver into its id_table. P.S. There are actually a few drivers in current mainline that uses mentioned approach, but with this patch it will be not needed anymore. -- Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> Intel Finland Oy -- 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/
