Re: [PATCH] Minor change to platform_device_register_simpleprototype

[Jean Delvare]

Hi Dmitry,

> Another thing - bunch of input code currently creates platform devices
> but does not create corresponding platform drivers (because they don't
> support suspend/resume or shutdown and probing is done right there in
> module init function).
> 
> What is the general policy on platform devices? Should they always have
> a corresponding driver or is it OK to leave them without one?

If it wasn't OK, I'd expect platform_device_alloc and
platform_device_register to fail when no matching driver is found.
Since they do not, I'd guess it is considered OK not to have a matching
driver. But that's really only a guess and not a replacement for
Russell's (or Greg's) authoritative answer.

Reciprocally, if it is finally decided that it is *not* OK to have a
platform device without a driver, they we want to make both functions
mentioned above fail when no match is found.

I am interested in the answer myself, as I am just realizing that my
own driver registers a platform driver but doesn't use it at all, just
like Dmitry described for his input drivers - so if I am allowed not to
register this platform driver I may just drop that part.

Thanks,
-- 
Jean Delvare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/