[RFC] device.h: add device_set_platdata routine

Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de
Tue Mar 1 02:59:53 EST 2011


[added gregkh and lkml to Cc:]

Hi Viresh,

On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 10:03:20AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> device.h supports device_get_platdata but doesn't support device_set_platdata.
> This routine is required by platforms in which device structure is declared
> in a machine specific file and platform data comes from board specific file.
> 
> This will be used by SPEAr patches sent in separate patch series.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at st.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/device.h |    5 +++++
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
> index 1bf5cf0..6ce0f20 100644
> --- a/include/linux/device.h
> +++ b/include/linux/device.h
> @@ -576,6 +576,11 @@ static inline void *dev_get_platdata(const struct device *dev)
>  	return dev->platform_data;
>  }
>  
> +static inline void dev_set_platdata(struct device *dev, void *platdata)
> +{
> +	dev->platform_data = platdata;
> +}
> +
Note that dev->platform_data was designed to hold dynamically allocated
memory, at least it's kfreed in platform_device_release.  And note there
is platform_device_add_data that kmemdups its argument into
pdev->dev.platform_data.

Compared to your dev_set_platdata platform_device_add_data only works
for platform_devices, don't know if it's worth to change that.

And regarding platform_device_add_data I wonder if it wouldn't be more
consistent to set platform_data = NULL if (!data)?  Greg?

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list