Re: [PATCH 0/3] Qualcomm Resource Power Manager driver

[Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>]

On May 28, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@kryo.se> wrote:

> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On May 27, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> This series adds a regulator driver for the Resource Power Manager found in
>>> Qualcomm 8660, 8960 and 8064 based devices.
>>> 
>>> The RPM driver exposes resources to its child devices, that can be accessed to
>>> implement drivers for the regulators, clocks and bus frequency control that's
>>> owned by the RPM in these devices.
>> 
>> Rather than adding yet another mfd driver, how about we put this in drivers/soc/qcom as a much better location for the low level rpm code.  Some code already merged in arm-soc for creation of drivers/soc/qcom/
> 
> Hi Kumar,
> 
> I do see rpm as somewhat equivalent to a pmic and that was why I
> followed suite and put it in mfd, but I can of course move it if you
> prefer.
> 
> 
> Lately I've been working on rpm, rpm-smd, smem, smd, smsm, smp2p
> patches for mainline.
> It could be argued that smd is a bus and should go in drivers/bus, but
> for the rest I fear that we just created drivers/soc/qcom as another
> dumping ground for things; a "Qualcomm specific drivers/mfd".
> 
> But maybe that is the purpose of it ;)

It is the purpose so that as we see common patterns between either drivers/soc/<VENDOR> we can refactor in the future.  However, we need to all a little time for those patterns to emerge rather than shoe horning in drivers into places that don’t make sense.

> 
> If I move the rpm driver, are there any conclusion to where I should
> move the dt binding documentation?

devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom
include/dt-bindings/soc

> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn

- k

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation