From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754530AbaCRIuv (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Mar 2014 04:50:51 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f176.google.com ([74.125.82.176]:46937 "EHLO mail-we0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754485AbaCRIup (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Mar 2014 04:50:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 08:50:39 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Robert Baldyga Cc: Mark Brown , Chanwoo Choi , sameo@linux.intel.com, myungjoo.ham@samsung.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, cooloney@gmail.com, rpurdie@rpsys.net, dbaryshkov@gmail.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, a.zummo@towertech.it, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, k.kozlowski@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] mfd: max8997: move regmap handling to function drivers Message-ID: <20140318085039.GF25478@lee--X1> References: <1394703532-494-1-git-send-email-r.baldyga@samsung.com> <1394703532-494-5-git-send-email-r.baldyga@samsung.com> <532191E6.6080108@samsung.com> <20140313125504.GA10356@lee--X1> <20140313140901.GW366@sirena.org.uk> <5322E653.90107@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <5322E653.90107@samsung.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >>> Is it necessary? If previous mfd driver has various i2c line, previous mfd driver > >>> initialize regmap/i2c setting on mfd driver. > >>> I'm not sure that regmap/i2c setting code move from mfd driver to each driver. > >>> > >>> Dear Lee Jones, > >>> I need your opinion about moving regmap/i2c code from mfd driver to each driver. > > > >> I'd rather take advice from Mark on this one. > > > > I don't really case that much; I'm having a hard time seeing it as > > particularly useful to do the refactoring but if it makes people > > happy... Keeping things in the core would help promote reusability I > > guess but I'm not sure that's likely to actually happen with this sort > > of driver/device. > > If you think it's not needed, you can ignore this patch. I prepared it > due to Dmitry Torokhov suggestion. If you think it's useless it doesn't > make me unhappy :) Ignored, thanks. ;) -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog