On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 05:28:57PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:

On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 16:12 +0100, Jamie Iles wrote:

quoted

-	res1 = platform_get_resource(dev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 1);
+	if (!dev->dev.of_node)
+		res1 = platform_get_resource(dev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 1);
+	else
+		res1 = gpio_nand_of_get_io_sync(&dev->dev);
+
 	if (res1) {
 		gpiomtd->io_sync = request_and_remap(res1, 4, "NAND sync", &ret);
 		if (!gpiomtd->io_sync) {

@@ -257,7 +362,16 @@ static int __devinit gpio_nand_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
 		}
 	}
 
-	memcpy(&gpiomtd->plat, dev->dev.platform_data, sizeof(gpiomtd->plat));
+	if (dev->dev.of_node)
+		kfree(res1);
+
+	if (dev->dev.platform_data)
+		memcpy(&gpiomtd->plat, dev->dev.platform_data,
+		       sizeof(gpiomtd->plat));
+	else
+		ret = gpio_nand_of_get_config(&dev->dev, &gpiomtd->plat);
+	if (ret)
+		goto err_nce;
 

So with this code you can mix platform data and DT? Say, io_sync may
come from platform data and the rest from the DT? Is this normal
practice?

Well you can use platform_data with DT - it's the only way to pass 
function pointers for example, but I'm not convinced it's required in 
this case (there is the adjust_parts callback, but I can't see a user of 
it) so I'd be inclined to change the conditionals to:

	if (!dev->dev.of_node)
		memcpy(&gpiomtd->plat, dev->dev.platform_data, ...);
	else
		gpio_nand_of_get_config(...);

so that we don't use platform_data for the DT case.

Jamie