[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A365FE6.8080908@atmel.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:51:18 +0200
From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
To: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
CC: Rob Emanuele <poorarm@...reis.com>,
Andrew Victor <avictor.za@...il.com>,
Joey Oravec <joravec@...wtech.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, drzeus-mmc@...eus.cx
Subject: Re: [PATCH][Fix] New Unified AVR32/AT91 MCI Driver that supports
both MCI slots used at the same time
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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists