[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <842A7147-A2CC-42BD-9947-CBADF738DC92@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:03:44 -0500
From: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@...o.se>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Qualcomm Resource Power Manager driver
On Jun 18, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org> wrote:
> Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@...o.se> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org> wrote:
>>> +Paul Walmsley
>>>
>>> Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> This series adds a regulator driver for the Resource Power Manager found in
>>>> Qualcomm 8660, 8960 and 8064 based devices.
>>>>
>>>> The RPM driver exposes resources to its child devices, that can be accessed to
>>>> implement drivers for the regulators, clocks and bus frequency control that's
>>>> owned by the RPM in these devices.
>>>>
>>>> Changes since v2:
>>>> - Fix copy-paste error in dt binding
>>>> - Correct incomplete move from mfd to soc
>>>> - Correct const mistake in regulator driver
>>>>
>>>> Changes since v1:
>>>> - Moved rpm driver to drivers/soc
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I follow the motivation for having this under drivers/soc?
>>>
>> Hi Kevin,
>>
>> I've made the argument that to me this is conceptually a black box
>> handling regulators, clocks and other stuff; hence similar to a PMIC,
>> which would fit nicely into drivers/mfd.
>>
>> I still think this is the case and now that I look back I didn't get
>> any pushback from Lee Jones so maybe the move was premature?
>
> Yes, IMO, the move was premature, but hopefully the drivers/soc folks
> can chime in an clarify the criteria for inclusion there.
>
> Kevin
I dont agree, I think having this in drivers/soc means that we can clearly go through drivers/soc in the future and look for patterns across SoCs that should be re-factored. Where MFD seems like its become the new drivers misc.
- k
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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