On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 11:42:34AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:

quoted

Russell, it seems to me that the primary behaviour that amba_bus has
over platform_bus is the clock management, and secondarily
verification of the type of device by the device id. ?Am I correct, or
am I missing something?

It matches by vendor/device ID just like PCI does, and does the bus
clock management and power management in a really nice way, which I
doubt platform devices will ever do.

The way this discussion is going, I'm going to suggest that we also
convert PCI stuff to being platform devices too. ?I don't see the
point of PCI existing for all the same reasons being given in this
thread.

I certainly don't see that as being the direction this discussion is going.

I see a serious question about how best to model AMBA primecell
devices in the device tree, and a similarly serious question about
whether to instantiate them as platform_devices or amba_devices.
Modelled behaviour in this case (clock/power management) is
particularly important, and you're right, platform_devices will never
implement that behaviour in the core code (this issue has already been
pushed back on; see discussions about omap_device).

g.