Re: [RFC v2 6/8] gpu: drm: tegra: Remove redundant host1x

[Terje BergstrÃm]

On 20.12.2012 19:14, Stephen Warren wrote:
> I'm not sure that sounds right. drvdata is something that a driver
> should manage itself.
> 
> What's wrong with just having each device ask the host1x (its parent)
> for a pointer to the (dummy) tegradrm device. That seems extremely
> simple, and doesn't require abusing existing stuff like drvdata for
> non-standard purposes.

This is tegradrm's own data, and it's tegradrm which accesses the
pointer. So it's entirely something that the driver takes care of itself.

It's simplest if tegradrm takes care of its own data. That way there's
no chance of confusion of ownership or lifecycle of the data. The only
places which needs this access are the probe functions, and adding an
API contract between two components just for these few calls sounds too
much. All code after that anyway access drm_device->dev_private to get
the pointer.

Terje
--
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/