[PATCH 04/18] ARM: imx: cpuidle: create separate drivers for imx5/imx6

[Shawn Guo]

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 08:58:52AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 04/12/2013 08:05 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 04:22:09PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> The code intializes the cpuidle driver at different places.
> >> The cpuidle driver for :
> >>   * imx5 : is in the pm-imx5.c, the init function is in cpuidle.c
> >>   * imx6 : is in cpuidle-imx6q.c, the init function is in cpuidle.c
> >>            and cpuidle-imx6q.c
> >>
> >> Instead of having the cpuidle code spread across different files,
> >> let's write a driver for each SoC and make the code similar.
> >>
> >> That implies some code duplication but that will be fixed with the
> >> next patches which consolidate the initialization for all the drivers.
> >>
> > IMO, this is unnecessary churn.  I agree that we can have cpuidle-imx5.c
> > instead of carrying imx5 cpuidle code in pm-imx5.c.  But removing
> > cpuidle.c and duplicating what imx_cpuidle_init() does into imx5 and
> > imx6q driver is a step backward to me.
> > I suggest simply merging this patch into "[PATCH 18/18] ARM: imx:
> > cpuidle: use init/exit common routine"
> 
> Yes, I am aware that can can look weird but that was to have the
> different steps to reach the common register function.
> If I merge this patch with the patch 18, I am afraid the modification
> won't be obvious to the one who will read the patch later (eg. for a git
> bisect).
> 
> It is quite easy to fold the patches, but with the comment above do you
> still want me to do that ?

You can have a separate patch introducing cpuidle-imx5.c, but please do
not duplicate what imx_cpuidle_init() does into cpuidle-imx5.c and
cpuidle-imx6q.c.

Shawn