Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 07 Jan 2013 09:58:15 -0700 | From | Stephen Warren <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: tegra114: add pinctrl driver for NVIDIA's Tegra114 SoC |
| |
On 01/05/2013 05:02 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > From: Pritesh Raithatha <praithatha@nvidia.com> > > This adds a driver for the Tegra114 pinmux, and required > parameterization data for Tegra114. > > The driver uses the common Tegra pincontrol driver utility > functions to implement the majority of the driver. > > This driver is not compatible with the earlier NVIDIA's SoCs, > hence add new compatibile as "nvidia,tegra114-pinmux". > > Originally written by Pritesh. > ldewangan: cleanup the patches, remove non-require tables.
> +static struct platform_driver tegra114_pinctrl_driver = { > + .driver = { > + .name = "tegra114-pinctrl", > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > + .of_match_table = tegra114_pinctrl_of_match, > + }, > + .probe = tegra114_pinctrl_probe, > + .remove = tegra_pinctrl_remove, > +};
> + > +static int __init tegra114_pinctrl_init(void) > +{ > + return platform_driver_register(&tegra114_pinctrl_driver); > +} > +arch_initcall(tegra114_pinctrl_init); > + > +static void __exit tegra114_pinctrl_exit(void) > +{ > + platform_driver_unregister(&tegra114_pinctrl_driver); > +} > +module_exit(tegra114_pinctrl_exit);
I believe that last chunk should be module_platform_driver(tegra114_pinctrl_driver), since now that everything is instantiated purely from DT, I don't believe there's any probe ordering advantage to be gained from using arch_initcall() rather than module_init().
Aside from that, the series, Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
I didn't check the content of all the tables, but the structure looks good!
| |