[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikJcug7LUTgX_YDD4Z8ZBrdkAdLq8_Epa6TkA5f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:21:05 +0100
From: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@...il.com>
To: Michael Büsch <mb@...sch.de>
Cc: linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Merging SSB and HND/AI support
On 17 January 2011 11:56, Michael Büsch <mb@...sch.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 11:46 +0100, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>> a) Merge the HND/AI code into the current SSB code, or
>>
>> b) add the missing code for SoCs to brcm80211 and replace the SSB code with it.
>
> Why can't we keep those two platforms separated?
> Is there really a lot of shared code between SSB and HND/AI?
Yes, as far as I understand the AI bus behaves mostly like a SSB bus
except for places like enabling/disabling cores. E.g. the AI bus also
has a common core, which has a bit for telling whether its a SSB or AI
bus, and has the mostly the same registers as the SSB common cores (so
most driver_chipcommon_* stuff also applies for the AI bus).
> It's true that there's currently a lot of device functionality built
> into ssb. Like pci bridge, mips core, extif, etc...
> If you take all that code out, you're probably not left with anything.
That's because most shared code isn't in brcm80211, but only found in
the SDKs for the SoCs.
> So why do we need to replace or merge SSB in the first place? Can't
> it co-exist with HND/AI?
It probably can, but then the SSB code must be at least made AI aware
so it doesn't try to attach itself if it finds one. Also I don't know
if it is a good idea to let arch-specific code depend on code in
staging.
Jonas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists