On 07/05/2016 03:36 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 03:07:12PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> Make it clear that these functions take a device_node structure pointer > > Hi Florian > > Didn't we agree that we would only support a single device via a C > coded platform data structure?
That is true for the devices I know about, both in and out of tree, however, while discussing offline with Vivien it seemed like there was a potential need for having a x86-based platform which could need that, Vivien do you think this platform could be in-tree one day (if not already)? > > All the functions you are renaming will never be called in that > case. So i think they can retain there names. You have no need to add > none device node equivalents. > > So lets drop this patch. > > Andrew > -- Florian
