Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 08/12] i2c: designware: Introduce platform drivers glue layer interface | From | Jarkko Nikula <> | Date | Mon, 25 May 2020 16:16:05 +0300 |
| |
Hi
On 5/21/20 5:37 AM, Serge Semin wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:46:11PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote: >> Hi >> >> On 5/10/20 12:50 PM, Serge Semin wrote: >>> Seeing the DW I2C platform driver is getting overcomplicated with a lot of >>> vendor-specific configs let's introduce a glue-layer interface so new >>> platforms which equipped with Synopsys Designware APB I2C IP-core would >>> be able to handle their peculiarities in the dedicated objects. >>> >> Comment to this patch and patches 9/12 and 12/12: >> >> Currently i2c-designware-platdrv.c is about 500 lines of code so I don't >> think it's too overcomplicated. But I feel we have already too many Kconfig >> options and source modules for i2c-designware and obviously would like to >> push back a little from adding more. >> >> I don't think i2c-designware-platdrv.c becomes yet too complicated if Baikal >> related code is added there, perhaps under #ifdef CONFIG_OF like MSCC Ocelot >> code is currently. > > Well, it's up to you to decide, what solution is more suitable for you to > maintain. My idea of detaching the MSCC and Baikal-T1 code to the dedicated > source files was to eventually move the whole i2c-designware-* set of files > into a dedicated directory drivers/i2c/buses/dw as it's done for some others > Synopsys DesignWare controllers: drivers/pci/controller/dwc/, drivers/usb/dwc2, > drivers/usb/dwc3, drivers/net/ethernet/synopsys/ . If you think, that it's too > early for Dw I2C code to live in a dedicated directory, fine with me. I can > merge the MSCC and Baikal-T1 code back into the i2c-designware-platdrv.c . > So what's your final word in this matter? > I think sub directory decision under each subsystem is more subsystem rather than vendor/driver specific. Good point anyway.
For this patchset I'd like more if changes are done to i2c-designware-platdrv.c since it's not too complicated yet :-)
If it starts to look too messy in the future then it's time split I think.
Jarkko
| |