On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:59:15AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 01/19/2017 10:12 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > > Back to the actual code that triggered this discussion, the whole > > purpose is just a safeguard. Given a device reference, we can assume > > that it is indeed the backing device for a net_device, and we could do a > > to_net_device() right away (and crash if someone did not write correct > > platform_data structures), or, by walking the device tree (the device > > driver model one) we can make sure it does belong in the proper class > > and this is indeed what we think it is. > > Greg, did Russell's explanation clarify things, or do you still think > this is completely bogus and we need to re design the whole thing? > > Just asking so I can try to resubmit just the preparatory parts or just > the whole thing.
Sorry, I haven't gotten back to this, it's lower on my list. Should try to get to it tomorrow...
