Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 14:23:52 -0700
From: David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: wim@iguana.be, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: intel-mid: add watchdog platform code for
 Merrifield
Message-ID: <20140410212352.GE28420@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
References: <1396990744-10695-1-git-send-email-david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
 <1396990744-10695-3-git-send-email-david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
 <20140410191523.GA6206@roeck-us.net>
 <20140410193010.GD28420@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
 <20140410203536.GB25534@roeck-us.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140410203536.GB25534@roeck-us.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:35:36PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:30:10PM -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:15:23PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 01:59:04PM -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> > > > This patch adds platform code for Intel Merrifield.
> > > > Since the watchdog is not part of SFI table, we have no other option but
> > > > to manually register watchdog's platform device (argh!).
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > Does it really make sense to have this as separate patch ? 
> > > 
> > > It is quite common for watchdog (and many other) drivers to
> > > register the driver and instantiate the device. I think it
> > > would be better and more consistent to have both patches
> > > merged into one.
> > 
> > Are you talking about to merge them without code changes or make the
> > driver responsible for the device enumeration (by make the driver to
> > allocate the device)?
> > 
> > If it's a simple merge, I'd say I don't like to mix drivers and arch
> > patches.
> > 
> > If we're talking about moving the device registration to driver, I
> > strongly disagree it would be better and more consistent. The way I sent
> > the driver makes it less dependent of how the enumeration happens.
> > If this device is added to SFI table, the driver would need no change.
> > 
> I don't see why that would be a problem. Guess we'll have to agree
> to disagree.

Sounds fine :)
If you're not too much against keeping the way it is, I'd like to send
the v2 with 2 patches again.

Br, David

> 
> Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/