From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: joel@jms.id.au, jk@ozlabs.org, alistair@popple.id.au,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsi@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] fsi: Add regmap and refactor sbefifo
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 19:00:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y07pqhpm/1hzx9LR@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <36908c1d-4672-807a-d157-d3ccd0b03148@linux.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1003 bytes --]
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 09:02:33AM -0500, Eddie James wrote:
> On 10/17/22 12:37, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Is there any great reason to provide support in the regmap core for this
> > rather than just implementing in drivers/fsi? AFAICT this is just
> > ending up as an implementation detail of shared code in drivers/fsi and
> > won't have any external users?
> One reason is to have a common interface with the new FSI regmap. That way
> abstracting out the bus transfer is trivial in the new SBEFIFO driver,
> assuming the SBEFIFO driver should switch to use the FSI regmap.
> But you are correct, I doubt anyone else will use this. I suppose SBEFIFO
> may as well not use the regmap and just use some callbacks for whichever bus
> transfer...
I'm not saying don't use regmap, I'm saying why not just do this in the
driver - you can just as easily set the reg_read() and reg_write()
callbacks in an individual driver without needing to create a new regmap
bus type for just that one driver to use.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-18 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-14 22:05 Eddie James
2022-10-14 22:05 ` [PATCH 1/5] regmap: Add FSI bus support Eddie James
2022-10-14 22:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] regmap: Add IBM I2CR support Eddie James
2022-10-14 22:05 ` [PATCH 3/5] drivers: fsi: Rename sbefifo and occ sources Eddie James
2022-10-14 22:05 ` [PATCH 4/5] drivers: fsi: separate char device code for occ and sbefifo Eddie James
2022-10-17 20:53 ` kernel test robot
2022-10-14 22:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] drivers: fsi: occ and sbefifo refactor Eddie James
2022-10-17 22:34 ` kernel test robot
2022-10-17 23:35 ` kernel test robot
2022-10-18 13:14 ` kernel test robot
2022-10-17 17:37 ` [PATCH 0/5] fsi: Add regmap and refactor sbefifo Mark Brown
2022-10-18 14:02 ` Eddie James
2022-10-18 18:00 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2022-10-18 22:03 ` Andrew Jeffery
2022-10-19 18:59 ` Eddie James
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y07pqhpm/1hzx9LR@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=alistair@popple.id.au \
--cc=eajames@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jk@ozlabs.org \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=linux-fsi@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®