From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] OMAP: OPP: twl/tps: Introduce TWL/TPS-specific code Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:03:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4C938326.6080400@ti.com> References: <1284587799-9637-1-git-send-email-khilman@deeprootsystems.com> <1284587799-9637-3-git-send-email-khilman@deeprootsystems.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB03294424F5@dbde02.ent.ti.com> <4C920A49.5010105@ti.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB032944262A@dbde02.ent.ti.com> <4C92246C.3010404@ti.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0329539FDF@dbde02.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:43249 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754062Ab0IQPDF (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:03:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0329539FDF@dbde02.ent.ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Gopinath, Thara" Cc: Kevin Hilman , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Gopinath, Thara had written, on 09/17/2010 09:57 AM, the following: [..] >>>>>>>>> From: Paul Walmsley >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The OPP layer code should be independent of the PMIC, >>>>>>>>> introduce the TWL/TPS-specific code out to its own file. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have been using this code for a while now. I really do not think wee need a separate >>>>>>> file for implementing the vsel to voltage in (uV) and vice versa formulas. Today only voltage >>>>>> This split introduces a PMIC level abstraction already. Do you have a >>>>>> suggestion which file it should go to? It is definitely not part of >>>>>> opp.c, not part of other existing twl files as well. the job of this >>>>>> file was to introduce conversion routines which can be used by any layer >>>>>> (voltage layer if need be - it used to be srf and smartreflex before).. >>>>>> in fact one of your voltage layer patches introduces capability for 6030 >>>>>> as well >>>>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=128213020927919&w=2 >>>> Yes one of my patches has introduces this coz I had no other way >>>> to add OMAP4 support. But I still do not understand why cant these >>>> APIs be implemented in twl-core.c or twl4030-power.c? >>> Why there? Twl power does regulator operations not conversion >>> operations. core is not the place either as it is function independent. > > Why do you say core is not the place. For me core is exactly > the place. It is the PMIC driver file. See [1] - they are all generic without a specific domain implementation. if we are so touchy about the location we want these api implementation, I guess core might be a compromise enough.. personally even though I believe core should remain specific functionality independent, I dont think I have very strong opinions about adding helpers there.. i would'nt put registration there though.. That should be in board files.. [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/khilman/linux-omap-pm.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mfd/twl4030-core.c;h=769b34bd48e445880ac0920423d9b73eabaf4cb7;hb=HEAD -- Regards, Nishanth Menon From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nm@ti.com (Nishanth Menon) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:03:02 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/4] OMAP: OPP: twl/tps: Introduce TWL/TPS-specific code In-Reply-To: <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0329539FDF@dbde02.ent.ti.com> References: <1284587799-9637-1-git-send-email-khilman@deeprootsystems.com> <1284587799-9637-3-git-send-email-khilman@deeprootsystems.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB03294424F5@dbde02.ent.ti.com> <4C920A49.5010105@ti.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB032944262A@dbde02.ent.ti.com> <4C92246C.3010404@ti.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0329539FDF@dbde02.ent.ti.com> Message-ID: <4C938326.6080400@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Gopinath, Thara had written, on 09/17/2010 09:57 AM, the following: [..] >>>>>>>>> From: Paul Walmsley >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The OPP layer code should be independent of the PMIC, >>>>>>>>> introduce the TWL/TPS-specific code out to its own file. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have been using this code for a while now. I really do not think wee need a separate >>>>>>> file for implementing the vsel to voltage in (uV) and vice versa formulas. Today only voltage >>>>>> This split introduces a PMIC level abstraction already. Do you have a >>>>>> suggestion which file it should go to? It is definitely not part of >>>>>> opp.c, not part of other existing twl files as well. the job of this >>>>>> file was to introduce conversion routines which can be used by any layer >>>>>> (voltage layer if need be - it used to be srf and smartreflex before).. >>>>>> in fact one of your voltage layer patches introduces capability for 6030 >>>>>> as well >>>>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=128213020927919&w=2 >>>> Yes one of my patches has introduces this coz I had no other way >>>> to add OMAP4 support. But I still do not understand why cant these >>>> APIs be implemented in twl-core.c or twl4030-power.c? >>> Why there? Twl power does regulator operations not conversion >>> operations. core is not the place either as it is function independent. > > Why do you say core is not the place. For me core is exactly > the place. It is the PMIC driver file. See [1] - they are all generic without a specific domain implementation. if we are so touchy about the location we want these api implementation, I guess core might be a compromise enough.. personally even though I believe core should remain specific functionality independent, I dont think I have very strong opinions about adding helpers there.. i would'nt put registration there though.. That should be in board files.. [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/khilman/linux-omap-pm.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mfd/twl4030-core.c;h=769b34bd48e445880ac0920423d9b73eabaf4cb7;hb=HEAD -- Regards, Nishanth Menon