[PATCH v2 00/17] omap: mailbox: reorganize init

[Hiroshi DOYU]

From: ext Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] omap: mailbox: reorganize init
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 18:57:55 +0200

> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU at nokia.com> wrote:
>> From: ext Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at gmail.com>
>>> I'm not familiar with this kind of module loading, but certainly not
>>> all systems have udev.
>>>
>>> I realized the problem because I have a bare-bones system in my
>>> beagleboard where I had to manually load mailbox_mach.
>>
>> With udev or something equivalent, it should work fine.
> 
> But still, you are relying on udev. I don't think we should, and I
> don't think there's any need.

Some expert may give some comment here.....

>>>> The platform device omap2-mailbox accomodatess logical mboxes.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be better the way my patches handle them?
>>>  * devices.ko:  doesn't care about mbox
>>>  * mach_omap1/mailbox.ko:  registers "omap-mailbox" platform device
>>> with a list of logical mboxes for OMAP1
>>>  * mach_omap2/mailbox.ko:  registers "omap-mailbox" platform device
>>> with a list of logical mboxes for OMAP2
>>>  * plat-omap/mailbox.ko: creates platform driver based on logical list
>>> of mboxes from platform device and handles the list internally
>>>
>>> The end result would be the exactly same, except that there's no hard
>>> dependency between the mach, and plat code.
>>
>> With the attachemnt, which is just 17 lines of code, you will get the
>> structure of logical mbox devices, which are located under the single
>> platform device, "omap2-mailbox". This is more _descriptive_ since
>> it displays the connection of a platform device and logical devices,
>> IOW, where these logical ones come. I don't see any point of not using
>> this struture.
> 
> That's neat. Am I understanding correctly that that's not an argument
> against the split of mailbox_mach and plat mailbox?

I may not get your point. That's just 17 lines of code, nothing else.

>>>> Would it be possible to rebase them on the top of my coming patch to
>>>> get back logical device entry?
>>>
>>> Where is that?
>>
>> Attached. Would it be possible to rebase the cleanups on this one?
> 
> I think it would be easier to apply the patch on top of my patch
> series... specially since it's so small. Would that be acceptable?

I can pick up some of your cleanups if applied on the previous attachemnt.