[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0d2f503f-bd45-0009-343c-e6d47d7d6fe1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 19:33:10 +0200
From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Daniel Gomez <dagmcr@...il.com>, f.fainelli@...il.com,
davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, javier@...hile0.org,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: Micrel eth switch: declare missing of table
On 23.04.2019 14:28, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> I wonder why this SPI driver is under drivers/net/phy. Just because
>> the SPI IP is found on an ethernet switch chip? And even then it
>> would be wrong, I see no link to a PHY at all. I'd say the driver
>> belongs to drivers/spi. Shouldn't we move it?
>
> This driver is old. It is probably from before the time of DSA. At
> least in the OpenWRT world, switches have been thought of as PHY
> devices, since they connect to a MAC. All the OpenWRT switch drivers
> are in the phy directory.
>
> There is no good place for this. It is not a PHY, but it is a network
> driver so should be somewhere under driver/net. There are no other net
> drivers in driver/spi, etc.
>
Except having "switch" in the name this driver is solely a SPI driver
and it uses no network code at all. And it has no dependency on any
network driver. Therefore I wouldn't consider it a network driver.
Else any functionality found on a SoC would need to be under drivers/soc ;)
> Since there is not a good place for it, not moving it is the easiest
> thing to do.
>
> Andrew
>
Heiner
Powered by blists - more mailing lists