Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] power: implement platform battery driver

[Paul Fertser]

Hi, 

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 04:08:14AM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 05:37:52AM +0300, Paul Fertser wrote:
> [...]
> > +static int platform_bat_get_property(struct power_supply *psy,
> > +				       enum power_supply_property psp,
> > +				       union power_supply_propval *val)
> > +{
> > +	struct platform_battery *bat =
> > +				container_of(psy, struct platform_battery, psy);
> > +	size_t i;
> > +	int present = 1;
> > +
> > +	if (bat->pdata->is_present)
> > +		present = bat->pdata->is_present();
> > +
> > +	if (psp != POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_PRESENT && !present)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < psy->num_properties; i++)
> > +		if (psy->properties[i] == psp) {
> > +			val->intval = bat->pdata->get_property[i]();
> > +			return 0;
> > +		}
> 
> I'm not sure I like this. Why don't you just pass the enum
> to pdata hook? So platform devices would just use a single
> get_property function and a 'switch', like the rest of the
> power supply drivers.

Of course, i thought about that. It seemed to me that it would tie platform
code and power_supply API a bit too much, so if you ever change the API,
the platform code would need to be changed as well. But if you think that
it is a non-issue, sure, i'll do it the way you suggest.

-- 
Be free, use free (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) software!
mailto:fercerpav@xxxxxxxxx
--
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/