Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] drm/pl111: Initial drm/kms driver for pl111

From	Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] drm/pl111: Initial drm/kms driver for pl111
Date	2017-03-21 20:50 +0100
Message-ID	<tnxX4-7To-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tnf46-3s4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tnf46-3s4-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <tnvVg-6v1-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 04:36:14PM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> +static struct amba_driver pl111_amba_driver = {
>> +	.drv = {
>> +		.name = "clcd-pl11x",
>
> either:
>
> 		.name = "clcd-pl111",
>
> or:
>
> 		.name = "drm-clcd-pl111",
>
> otherwise the driver names will clash in sysfs - driver names must be
> unique.
>
>> +	},
>> +	.probe = pl111_amba_probe,
>> +	.remove = pl111_amba_remove,
>> +	.id_table = pl111_id_table,
>> +};
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_ARM_AMBA */
>> +
>> +module_amba_driver(pl111_amba_driver);
>> +
>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION(DRIVER_DESC);
>> +MODULE_AUTHOR("ARM Ltd.");
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:pl111_drm");
>
> Does the platform alias make sense for an OF-only driver?

Not sure, this is left over from the original submission.

If I renamed to drm-clcd-pl111 and dropped the alias, would that get
your ack?

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH v3 2/3] drm/pl111: Initial drm/kms driver for pl111 Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> - 2017-03-21 00:40 +0100
  Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] drm/pl111: Initial drm/kms driver for pl111 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> - 2017-03-21 18:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] drm/pl111: Initial drm/kms driver for pl111 Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> - 2017-03-21 20:50 +0100

csiph-web