No support of platform device instance id?

[Shawn Guo]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 03:10:19PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> 
[...]
> Several weeks back I posted a patch for of_platform_bus_snoop() which
> matches platform_device registrations to nodes in the device tree
> instead of allocating and registering a new device.  I've spent some
> more time on that patch in the last couple of weeks to the point that
> I'm happy with the model and I'm almost ready to push it out to my
> devicetree/test branch.  John Bonesio is currently refactoring and

I have seen it on devicetree/test branch.

> cleaning it up for me so that it can get posted.  You can see the
> current state in my devicetree/preregister branch, with tegra modified
> to use it.
> 
> The model is:
> 
> 1) Platform code calls of_platform_device_preregister() to tell the DT
>    code about the nodes it /intends/ to register as devices.
> 2) Platform code can register as many or as few platform_devices as it
>    likes.  If any of these devices match one of the nodes passed by
>    of_platform_device_preregister(), then the DT code will set the
>    of_node pointer before it gets bound to a device.
> 3) Platform code calls of_platform_device_probe() which will
>    register platform_devices for any nodes which *did not* get
>    assigned to a device in step 2.
> 
> I implemented this as a way to allow dt and non-dt use-cases to share
> the same SoC setup code so that anything on-chip would get registered
> in the same way, but would also get the benefit of being linked to its
> device tree node.  For example, to obtain the list of i2c devices or
> gpio connections from the tree.  It also helps solve the problem of
> matching nodes to clks which are currently matched by name.  I think
> it would also solve your use case, at least in the short term.
> 
I'm seeing this approach benefits the smooth moving of dt on ARM, but
will this be the ultimate shape of dt support on ARM?

-- 
Regards,
Shawn