Messages in this thread | | | From | Masahiro Yamada <> | Date | Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:14:32 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] mmc: tmio: rename files and CONFIG options to have the same prefix |
| |
Hi Geert,
2018-07-26 17:25 GMT+09:00 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>: > Hi Yamada-san, > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 5:33 AM Masahiro Yamada > <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote: >> As commit b6147490e6aa ("mmc: tmio: split core functionality, DMA and >> MFD glue") said, these MMC controllers use the IP from Panasonic. >> >> TMIO (Toshiba Mobile IO) MMC was the first upstreamed user of this IP. >> The common driver code was split and expanded as 'tmio-mmc-core', then >> it become historical misnomer since 'tmio' is not the name of this IP. >> >> I pointed out this [1], and suggested to re-organize the names in the >> form of: >> >> <IP-name>.c (common code for this IP) >> <IP-name>_tmio.c (Toshiba Mobile IO) >> <IP-name>_sdhi.c (Renesas SDHI) >> <IP-name>_uniphier.c (Socionext UniPhier) >> >> The <IP-name> in my mind was 'mnsd' because names of Panasonic chips >> are prefixed with 'MN'. >> >> This is the naming scheme as we see in dw_mmc* and sdhci-*. >> >> In the discussion with Wolfram Sang, my suggestion was rejected >> because it implied drastic function renaming, which is too invasive. >> >> Ulf Hansson was still happy with file renaming to clarify the >> relationship between variants. So, the accepted solution was: >> >> - Make 'tmio_mmc' the _right_ core name >> - Align all variant files with the same prefix. >> - Do not rename functions >> >> This commit renames files as follows: >> >> tmio_mmc_core.c -> tmio_mmc.c >> tmio_mmc.c -> tmio_mmc_original.c >> renesas_sdhi_core.c -> tmio_mmc_sdhi.c >> renesas_sdhi.h -> tmio_mmc_sdhi.h >> renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac.c -> tmio_mmc_sdhi_internal_dmac.c >> renesas_sdhi_sys_dmac.c -> tmio_mmc_sdhi_sys_dmac.c > > I have mixed feelings about the last two renames, especially about the last > one: SYS-DMAC is very Renesas-specific, as it's a separate IP block in > Renesas SoCs. > 1. Are there other SoCs using the same internal DMAC?
Probably no.
The original IP from Panasonic did not contain any internal DMA engine.
renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac.c is probably the Resansas' own extension.
Panasonic also implemented a different internal DMA engine (Socionext inherited the RTL from Panasonic).
This is completely different from the Renesas' implementation.
> If not, perhaps the "renesas" should be kept in the driver name?
I do not mind that, but the file name would be very long "tmio_mmc_renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac.c"
Or, do you mean "tmio_mmc_renesas_internal_dmac.c" ?
> 2. Are there other SoCs using an external DMAC?
Yes. Some old SoCs in UniPhier SoC family rely on the external DMAC, like renesas_sdhi_sys_dmac.c
> Is the interface to the external DMAC similar? > If yes, perhaps it should be renamed to tmio_mmc_sdhi_external_dmac.c?
"sdhi" is already Renesas-specific name, isn't it?
I really do not care, "sys" or "external" It is up to renesas folks .
> If not, perhaps the "renesas" should be kept in the driver name?
I am not quite sure, but this is less Renesas-specific since renesas_sdhi_sys_dmac.c is just a software abstraction layer. The real driver code is under drivers/dma/.
The difference is, in my case, TX and RX share a single DMA channel.
Thanks.
> Thanks! > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
| |