[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABb+yY0Wnqz9sHq5cq-HM0PnaoQEGZD4h3OFTrxNXFY-v5g_4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 20:55:50 +0530
From: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
To: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
frank.wang@...k-chips.com, khilman@...libre.com,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, Caesar Wang <wxt@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/9] mailbox: Add Amlogic Meson Message-Handling-Unit
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com> wrote:
>>
>> My main question is : do you really want to transform this simple driver into
>> a dirty multi-bus generic mailbox driver ?
>> The meson_mhu is only 199 lines and this patch adds 181 lines to the arm_mhu driver.
>>
>> I'll personally push to have two separate drivers here.
>>
> It is a shame if we need to copy a driver only due to changed register
> offsets. Let me give it a shot and see how worse off we would be.
>
OK, so I trimmed the differences further but it still doesn't look any
better. The best approach seems to be have a separate driver but with
consideration that its a 3rd party IP and hence likely to be used by
other platforms. That is, call it something meson-neutral. I will make
a few comments on the patch post.
Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists