Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761359AbZFOOwU (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:52:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752158AbZFOOwM (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:52:12 -0400 Received: from mail.atmel.fr ([81.80.104.162]:37761 "EHLO atmel-es2.atmel.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750929AbZFOOwM (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:52:12 -0400 Message-ID: <4A365FE6.8080908@atmel.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:51:18 +0200 From: Nicolas Ferre Organization: atmel User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Haavard Skinnemoen CC: Rob Emanuele , Andrew Victor , Joey Oravec , linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drzeus-mmc@drzeus.cx Subject: Re: [PATCH][Fix] New Unified AVR32/AT91 MCI Driver that supports both MCI slots used at the same time References: <20090611095432.2e3a4067@hskinnemoen-d830> <4A3219F6.6000300@atmel.com> <20090612112900.4435f70f@hskinnemoen-d830> In-Reply-To: <20090612112900.4435f70f@hskinnemoen-d830> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1242 Lines: 37 Haavard Skinnemoen : > Nicolas Ferre wrote: >>> Well, what is the best way to differentiate it from the at91_mci >>> driver and keep users from trying to use both drivers? >> I propose that we setup a kind of choice sub menu in the Kconfig for >> those two drivers when they are both supported. > > Shouldn't it be enough to simply add > > depends on !THE_OTHER_DRIVER > > to both of them? It does not seems to work... > Btw, what are the long-term plans for this? Should the at91_mci driver > be phased out once the atmel-mci driver supports all at91 and avr32 > devices? In my opinion, it is a bit early to tell. My thoughts were that I suspect we should keep at91_mci for at91rm9200 and at91sam9261/9261s as they contain an older revision of the MCI IP. In the meantime, Rob tend to integrate also code to manage those chips (without RDPROOF/WRPROOF switch). So, lets see how far we can go with the atmel-mci on at91 chips and then, consider a phase out. Regards, -- Nicolas Ferre -- 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/