lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Driver/IFC: Move Freescale IFC driver to a common driver
From
Date
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 20:45 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 13 January 2014, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 14:32 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Monday 13 January 2014, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
> > > > Freescale IFC controller has been used for mpc8xxx. It will be used
> > > > for ARM-based SoC as well. This patch moves the driver to driver/misc
> > > > and fix the header file includes.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabhakar@freescale.com>
> > >
> > > No objections to the driver, but drivers/misc doesn't seem like the
> > > right place. Why not drivers/mfd or drivers/memory?
> >
> > It's not a memory controller in the sense that I think most people would
> > interpret the phrase, but I guess it's similar in function to
> > mvebu-devbus. If drivers/memory is broad enough to cover such things,
> > and doesn't have a memory controller subsystem that drivers are supposed
> > to register with, then that could work.
> >
> > Are things in drivers/mfd expected to interact with mfd-core.c? It's
> > not clear to me what that does or how it would be useful to the IFC
> > code.
>
> Sorry, I meant mtd not mfd. mtd would make sense if the only devices
> behind it are things like flash or sram memory.

Some of the things behind it are flash, but those portions of the driver
are already in drivers/mtd. This is just the common code.

-Scott




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-13 22:01    [W:0.149 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site