Am Mittwoch, 2. November 2011, 21:36:03 schrieb Thomas Abraham:

Hi Thomas,

in patch 1/6:

+static struct platform_device_id sdhci_s3c_driver_ids[] = {
+       {
+               .name           = "s3c-sdhci",
+               .driver_data    = (kernel_ulong_t)NULL,
+       },
+       {
+               .name           = "exynos4-sdhci",
+               .driver_data    = EXYNOS4_SDHCI_DRV_DATA,
+       },
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, sdhci_s3c_driver_ids);

and in patch 6/6:

+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
+static const struct of_device_id sdhci_s3c_dt_match[] = {
+	{ .compatible = "samsung,s3c6410-sdhci", },
+	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-sdhci",
+		.data = &exynos4_sdhci_drv_data },
+	{},
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sdhci_s3c_dt_match);

wouldn't it be better to keep the naming consistent between of and non-of?
I.e. s3c-sdhci vs. s3c6410-sdhci. Since the driver is used for all S3C SoCs 
containing hsmmc controllers I think s3c-sdhci would be preferable here.

Heiko