Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754760Ab2B1FpI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 00:45:08 -0500
Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:40305 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753468Ab2B1FpG convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 00:45:06 -0500
From: "Manjunathappa, Prakash" <prakash.pm@ti.com>
To: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>
CC: "davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com" 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@ti.com>,
        "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        "dwmw2@infradead.org" <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 2/3] arm:davinci: move emif driver to mfd framework
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v5 2/3] arm:davinci: move emif driver to mfd framework
Thread-Index: AQHM8jX94hGGsvaFkE+bBaOmSVmhh5ZQdwIAgAFTzjA=
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 05:44:39 +0000
Message-ID: <A73F36158E33644199EB82C5EC81C7BC3176D103@DBDE01.ent.ti.com>
References: <y> <1330005504-25321-3-git-send-email-prakash.pm@ti.com>
 <20120227142638.GN27687@sortiz-mobl>
In-Reply-To: <20120227142638.GN27687@sortiz-mobl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [172.24.170.142]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1425
Lines: 32

Hi Samuel,

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 19:56:38, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
[snip]
> So it seems you're passing a platform devices array through your mfd aemif
> platform data pointer. And from what I can see, it's mostly a 1 entry array
> (for the NAND case) or a 2 entries array (for the NAND and NOR case).
> In that case, adding an MFD driver in the middle brings basically nothing but
> confusion and overhead (and 200+ lines of code).
> So unless someone explains to me how this is doing any good to the kernel in
> general, I'm not going to take this patchset.
> 
> Cheers,
> Samuel.
>

In this way we trying to isolate future modification of aemif driver not to depict
as platform code change, the need for this is based on discussion in below thread
http://davinci-linux-open-source.1494791.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-arm-davinci-configure-davinci-aemif-chipselects-through-OF-tt7059739.html#none

Earlier also concern was expressed to move aemif driver out of arch/arm to drivers folder.
Here is the link for the same: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2011-August/037308.html
Since aemif driver supports NAND/NOR devices, we feel MFD is the place holder.

Thanks,
Prakash

--
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/