From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755488Ab2DSNyx (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:53 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:62564 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752965Ab2DSNyv (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:54:51 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ARM: OMAP2+: SmartReflex: move the driver specific macros in include/linux/power Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:54:38 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/3.3.0-rc1; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Trilok Soni , Jean Pihet , Kevin Hilman , "Cousson, Benoit" , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, LKML , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Jean Pihet References: <1332173578-27422-1-git-send-email-j-pihet@ti.com> <4F7D6746.9020504@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: <4F7D6746.9020504@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201204191354.38874.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:RHluUbO3HvXG3MjHkXMK3ghiYH75oYHYLVm03cqQRB6 m2X8UXvBKGUGOLkfi+zBrXIUkQz22BIae81HAdsLpqhwjIJDLq TByDX063xRsCVFc/wzliCyiaquLAHOknCWla31ItAPUXVPzhYv VWx4TFzRoDimE7AxAliIFQ8dBVmw8bTBo+/rxdD65f6c0JciPE 0nUZrgSc5lB7LGTX3kjUkO3f7IFKC2Yms+xU0vQeeKBLS5BJLa ijG4h20vKfJ0upJzXHShdlXHFxBYyymFstsR83kUkGzJX7Qdkh Ov8vy1EME2KqejC0JUUe/7VH9U0/tKpdmxrkaTRpb2fVCA8hYl oKNDFXGRK+GgLNriciAk= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 05 April 2012, Trilok Soni wrote: > >> Couple of suggestions: > >> > >> drivers/platform/omap/avs? > >> drivers/misc/omap/avs? > >> I would definitely prefer something under drivers/power, drivers/regulators or a new top-level directory under drivers. > >>> IIRC, David Brownell was referring to the rule of three for such case. > >>> Meaning that it worth having a generic fmwk when at least three > >>> different drivers are doing the same kind of things. > > > > Do OMAP v1 and OMAP v2 implementations count as 2 drivers? ;-) > > More seriously, the OMAP code for SmartReflex is far from complete in > > mainline. There is a plan to provide the following features: > > - OMAP v1 IP, > > - OMAP v2 IP, > > - class 1.5, > > - class 3, > > - class 3.5, > > - and more support for the upcoming chipsets. > > I don't understand much of these versions right now, but hopefully after > going through all these docs. My only contention point is to not create > any directory into the drivers/power, unless it is generic fwk and then > build up "client" drivers on top of it. Meanwhile we could move this > driver into above options as I have suggested. I think creating the directory in the place where we want the files to stay in the long run is ok, if the plan is to add more drivers and make the base code more generic. We don't have to wait until it's too late and we absolutely need a framework ;-) The part I don't understand is how this relates to the regulator framework. Is there any overlap between the functionality provided by the smartreflex framework and the regulator framework? If so, would it be better to extend the existing framework so it can do smartreflex as well? Arnd