Hi Greg,

Am 18.08.2016 um 12:57 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman =

[off-list ref]:

=20
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:54:15PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:

quoted

Hi Pavel,
=20

quoted

Am 18.08.2016 um 12:47 schrieb Pavel Machek [off-list ref]:
=20
=20

quoted

=20
Thereof 4 files, ~260 changes w/o gps demo and =

documentation/bindings.

quoted

quoted

=20
So what do you use for the serial devices? platform_device was =

vetoed

quoted

quoted

for that purpose by Greg.

=20
device tree?

=20
No.

? Sorry, but each time Pavel jumps in, he just copies half of a =
statement and
any reply gets misunderstood.

I did not even mention platform_device, still you disagree to device =
tree for the
*slave driver*?

=20
This patchset from Rob is the way I have been saying it should be done
for years now.  Yes, a "bus" takes up more boilerplate code (blame me
for that), but overall, it makes the drivers simpler,

Sorry, but I don't see how Rob's approach makes it simpler to write a =
device driver
than our original proposal, which btw is also sort of a bus and I see =
only some implementation
differences.

Except that IMHO Rob's approach lacks functions we need (which maybe can =
added).

and fits into the
rest of the kernel driver/device model much better.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus=