[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <195201cd6600$7cb089f0$76119dd0$%kim@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 07:47:34 +0900
From: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
To: 'Thomas Abraham' <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
'Jaehoon Chung' <jh80.chung@...sung.com>
Cc: linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
cjb@...top.org, grant.likely@...retlab.ca, rob.herring@...xeda.com,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, patches@...aro.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 0/6] mmc: dw_mmc: add support for device tree based
instantiation
Thomas Abraham wrote:
>
> On 19 July 2012 20:58, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com> wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > I think not good that added the samsung specific code into dw_mmc-
> pltfm.c
> > How about separating to dw-mmc-exynos.c?
>
> I am not sure of this. The only samsung specific code in
> dw_mmc-pltfm.c file is the data for of_device_id instances. The clock
> lookup added into this file in the 3rd patch does not cause any harm
> on non-samsung SoC's which might not define those clocks (on clock
> lookup failure, there are only warning printed, the driver's probe
> does not fail.
>
I agree with Thomas' opinion, in addition, the dw_mmc-pltfm.c file can
support that, so adding dw-mmc-exynos.c is not needed now.
> I would prefer not to add separate file for Exynos SoC's for now.
> Splitting into different files will need to defined new callbacks
> which I fell is not really required.
>
Yes.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
--
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