On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:40:56PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:21:26AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 07:14:03PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > This doesn't help unless you also provide a way for users to obtain a
> > > struct wm8400.
>
> > Why would they need it? Only code that creates instances of wm8400 needs
> > to know the definition of the sturcture, the rest can simply pass the
> > pointer around.
>
> > I guess there is disconnect between us and I do not see any users of
> > wm8400_register_regulator() in linux-next... Is there another tree I
> > could peek at?
>
> There are no users in mainline.  This would be called by board specific
> code from the init callback of the wm8400 - you'd need to pass that
> callback the struct wm8400.
>
> In any case, this is clearly an unrelated change to whatever else you
> were doing to the driver so should be split off into a separate patch,
> but if this is being changed at all then it'd be much more sensible to
> change it to use a more modern pattern which completely removes the
> wm8400_register_regulator() function and just uses platform data.

Fair enough, I removed the offending part, updated patch below.

--
Dmitry

regulator: wm8400 - cleanup platform driver data handling

Driver data set by platform_set_drvdata() is for private use of
the driver currently bound to teh device and not for use by parent,
subsystem and anyone else.

Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@mail.ru>
Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Signed-off-by: Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk>