[PATCH v5 2/3] arm:davinci: move emif driver to mfd framework

Samuel Ortiz sameo at linux.intel.com
Thu Mar 1 06:23:29 EST 2012

Hi Prakash,

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 05:44:39AM +0000, Manjunathappa, Prakash wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 19:56:38, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> [snip]
> > So it seems you're passing a platform devices array through your mfd aemif
> > platform data pointer. And from what I can see, it's mostly a 1 entry array
> > (for the NAND case) or a 2 entries array (for the NAND and NOR case).
> > In that case, adding an MFD driver in the middle brings basically nothing but
> > confusion and overhead (and 200+ lines of code).
> > So unless someone explains to me how this is doing any good to the kernel in
> > general, I'm not going to take this patchset.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Samuel.
> >
> In this way we trying to isolate future modification of aemif driver not to depict
> as platform code change, the need for this is based on discussion in below thread
> http://davinci-linux-open-source.1494791.n2.nabble.com/PATCH-arm-davinci-configure-davinci-aemif-chipselects-through-OF-tt7059739.html#none
I fail to see how you're going to achieve that with adding an MFD platform
device registration in the middle.

> Earlier also concern was expressed to move aemif driver out of arch/arm to drivers folder.
> Here is the link for the same: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2011-August/037308.html
> Since aemif driver supports NAND/NOR devices, we feel MFD is the place holder.
I would disagree with that. And it certainly makes sense to move many drivers
out of arch/arm into a more appropriate place but I'd like to keep mfd as
something else than yet another misc.


Intel Open Source Technology Centre

More information about the linux-mtd mailing list