On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 07:11:53PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 12:03:35PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
I'm not a fan of the platform bus but I have mixed feelings about creating a dedicated bus type. I guess if we really need a bus type we can do it later?
There was a discussion a while ago in the context of I2C/SPI MFDs which concluded that if you need a bus and it's going to be effectively noop then you should just use the platform bus as anything else will consist almost entirely of cut'n'paste from the platform bus with some light sed usage and code duplication is bad. It's not super lovely as it's not actually a memory mapped device but it's the best idea we've got.
Ugh, I hate that. What's wrong with using a "virtual" device instead?
I can create a "virtual" bus for things like this if they really want a "simple" bus, abusing platform for this is the major reason I hate the platform bus code...
thanks,
greg k-h