From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:52:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ew0-f224.google.com ([209.85.219.224]:62431 "EHLO mail-ew0-f224.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S1492516Ab0CILwS (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:52:18 +0100 Received: by ewy24 with SMTP id 24so1012567ewy.27 for ; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:52:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.213.100.151 with SMTP id y23mr4124128ebn.78.1268135532382; Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:52:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.2] (ppp91-77-52-186.pppoe.mtu-net.ru [91.77.52.186]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 16sm3051478ewy.11.2010.03.09.03.52.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:52:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B96364E.5050202@mvista.com> Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 14:51:42 +0300 From: Sergei Shtylyov User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Manuel Lauss CC: Linux-MIPS , Manuel Lauss Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Alchemy: move MMC driver registration to board code. References: <1268076181-29642-1-git-send-email-manuel.lauss@gmail.com> <1268076181-29642-3-git-send-email-manuel.lauss@gmail.com> <4B963210.7030906@ru.mvista.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 26152 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: sshtylyov@mvista.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Manuel Lauss wrote: >>> Where it really belongs to. >> I disagree (again). SoC platform devices dont belong with the board code. >> > > Figured as much. However with additional boards the #ifdef mess in > common/platform.c > is only going to get worse. MUCH worse. We could probably eliminate the board #ifdef in platfrom.c by not supplying the platfrom data for MMC1. > Just look at the au1000-eth platform data situation! > I have these platform devices on Au1200/Au1300 even thought they don't have > a built-in MAC. > Need to add the SoC type checks then when registering the devices. Or at least the #ifdef's. :-) > The board which uses the device should register it. Contrarywise, the SoC that has the devices, should register them. > But, consider the patch withdrawn. > Thanks. > Manuel > WBR, Sergei