Hi Heiko,
On 22 May 2014 17:56, Heiko Schocher hs@denx.de wrote:
Hello Simon,
Am 22.05.2014 22:34, schrieb Simon Glass:
+Tom
Hi Heiko,
On 22 May 2014 00:43, Heiko Schocherhs@denx.de wrote:
using UBI and DM together leads in compiler error, as both define a "struct device", so rename "struct device" in include/dm/device.h to "struct udevice", as we use linux code (MTD/UBI/UBIFS some USB code,...) and cannot change the linux "struct device"
Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocherhs@denx.de Cc: Simon Glasssjg@chromium.org Cc: Marek Vasutmarex@denx.de
I'm not 100% comfortable with this but if we really want to avoid changing kernel code that moves into U-Boot it is either this or a
I vote for this, as we want to sync with newer linux code from time to time, and not changing linux code in U-Boot makes this easier.
OK.
'#define device ldevice' at the top of the linux code/in a header. I'm not sure which is preferable.
Some USB Code (more too?) is also from linux ... Marek? What do you think?
I just did not change the current situation, but if we decide to go in this direction, I can try it ... but what, if a source code file uses the U-Boot driver model and linux code? Could we fall into such a case?
If Tom decides to apply this, I'd like to request that it be done soon, since it has wide impact on driver model code.
Another possibility is, to move driver model specific vars into the linux struct device ... which leads in a bigger "struct device" for the driver model ...
It sounds like Tom is happy with your patch as is, so let's go with that unless some serious issue comes up.
Acked-by: Simon Glasssjg@chromium.org
Regards, Simon
bye, Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Regards, Simon