Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] mux: mux-intel-usb: Add Intel USB Multiplexer driver

[sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy]

On 05/31/2017 08:30 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2017-05-31 16:18, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 31-05-17 15:05, Peter Rosin wrote:
> > > On 2017-05-31 14:21, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > actually this is the first time I hear about a mux framework
> > > > at all. Is there a git tree with the patches for this somewhere ?
> > > https://gitlab.com/peda-linux/mux.git in the "mux" branch.
> > >
> > > Series posted here:
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/5/14/160
> > Thank you.
> >
> > I see that mux_control_get() currently relies on devicetree describing
> > the mux, that is not going to work on non devicetree platforms like
> > x86 where the relation typically is not described ad all (*) ?
> Yes, I'm aware of this. I wanted to keep things simple. Also, see
> my reply on the other branch of this discussion.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/5/31/58
>
> > Typically there would be a global list of mux_controls maintained
> > by mux_[de]register and then mux_control_get() would walk this list
> > until it finds a matching name. The names to register would then be
> > passed in by platform data/code when registering and likewise the
> > consumer would be passed a unique name to pass into mux_control_get()
> > through platform data / code, would that work for you ?
> >
> > Note one option would be to set the names to use when registering
> > a mux chip through device_properties, this is what the power-supply
> > subsys is currently doing more or less.
> I had this lose plan to match by the struct device name, but if that
> is not working the above seems fine too...
By device name do you mean mux chip device name or the mux platform 
device name ?

If you mean former, since you are using ID framework, mux chip device 
name changes
dynamically. So we can't use a static name to identify this device from 
other drivers.
> Cheers,
> peda

--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux kernel developer