From patchwork Fri Jul 25 14:23:51 2014 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Pawel Moll X-Patchwork-Id: 4623581 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-linux-arm@patchwork.kernel.org Delivered-To: patchwork-parsemail@patchwork1.web.kernel.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.19.201]) by patchwork1.web.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 760259F380 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.kernel.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E8220211 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:27:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 764AB20212 for ; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:27:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XAgQR-0005Bs-Ky; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:24:47 +0000 Received: from fw-tnat.austin.arm.com ([217.140.110.23] helo=collaborate-mta1.arm.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XAgQH-00056J-56 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:24:37 +0000 Received: from hornet.Cambridge.Arm.com (hornet.cambridge.arm.com [10.2.201.42]) by collaborate-mta1.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 363A713FA91; Fri, 25 Jul 2014 09:24:15 -0500 (CDT) From: Pawel Moll To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: [PATCH 3/5] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Do not use parent as the host's device Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:23:51 +0100 Message-Id: <1406298233-27876-3-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 In-Reply-To: <1406298233-27876-1-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> References: <1406298233-27876-1-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20140725_072437_240165_6B357DA1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.44 ) X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Cc: paul@pwsan.com, Pawel Moll , Arnd Bergmann , Stephen Warren , Catalin Marinas , Peter De Schrijver , Anton Vorontsov , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Ball , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, arm@kernel.org, Olof Johansson , Ulf Hansson , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+patchwork-linux-arm=patchwork.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on mail.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP The code selecting a device for the sdhci host has been continuously tweaked (4b711cb13843f5082e82970dd1e8031383134a65 "mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Add structure for host-specific data" and a4d2177f00a5252d825236c5124bc1e9918bdb41 "mmc: sdhci-pltfm: dt device does not pass parent to sdhci_alloc_host") while there does not seem to be any reason to use platform device's parent in the first place. The comment saying "Some PCI-based MFD need the parent here" seem to refer to Timberdale FPGA driver (the only MFD driver registering SDHCI cell, drivers/mfd/timberdale.c) but again, the only situation when parent device matter is runtime PM, which is not implemented for Timberdale. Cc: Chris Ball Cc: Anton Vorontsov Cc: Ulf Hansson Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Signed-off-by: Pawel Moll --- This patch is a part of effort to remove references to platform_bus and make it static. Chris, Anton, Ulf - could you please advise if the assumptions above are correct or if I'm completely wrong? Do you know what where the real reasons to use parent originally? The PCI comment seems like a red herring to me... drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c | 9 ++------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c index 7e834fb..4996112 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c @@ -136,13 +136,8 @@ struct sdhci_host *sdhci_pltfm_init(struct platform_device *pdev, if (resource_size(iomem) < 0x100) dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Invalid iomem size!\n"); - /* Some PCI-based MFD need the parent here */ - if (pdev->dev.parent != &platform_bus && !np) - host = sdhci_alloc_host(pdev->dev.parent, - sizeof(struct sdhci_pltfm_host) + priv_size); - else - host = sdhci_alloc_host(&pdev->dev, - sizeof(struct sdhci_pltfm_host) + priv_size); + host = sdhci_alloc_host(&pdev->dev, + sizeof(struct sdhci_pltfm_host) + priv_size); if (IS_ERR(host)) { ret = PTR_ERR(host);