[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11848764.OZ77lJYCM4@wuerfel>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:27:04 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Tan Xiaojun <tanxiaojun@...wei.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
pawel.moll@....com, ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk,
galak@...eaurora.org, xuwei5@...ilicon.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, khilman@...aro.org,
k.kozlowski@...sung.com, amitdanielk@...il.com, heiko@...ech.de,
wxt@...k-chips.com, alex.aring@...il.com, qiang.zhao@...escale.com,
treding@...dia.com, rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk,
gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
geert+renesas@...der.be, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] Add Hisilicon Djtag driver
On Friday, July 22, 2016 11:56:49 AM CEST Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I understand that some SoC/socket level PMU is accessed via these
> registers. It doesn't make sense to review either in isolation. Please
> put together a unified series, with both the djtag accessors and the
> PMU code.
>
> On it's own, it's *very* difficult to understand how this fits into the
> SoC, and how it is to be used.
Is there anything else that the driver is used for?
Having it in drivers/soc/ feels wrong to me, and if there is only
one user, I'd recommend having it as part of the same driver module
as the code accessing it.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists