From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sameo@linux.intel.com (Samuel Ortiz) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 22:00:27 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 06/14] mfd: pxa-w1: MFD driver for PXA 1wire control + DS1WM chip In-Reply-To: References: <1303135451-26362-7-git-send-email-haojian.zhuang@marvell.com> <20110426094836.GD2659@sortiz-mobl> Message-ID: <20110522200026.GC18610@sortiz-mobl> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Haojian, On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:21:25PM +0800, Haojian Zhuang wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Samuel Ortiz wrote: > > Hi Haojian, > > > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:04:03PM +0800, Haojian Zhuang wrote: > >> This driver provides registers and IRQ of PXA3xx chips to the ds1wm driver. > > I see why this is needed, but I really think the ds1wm driver should be > > converted to a regular platform device. The MFD driver below is just adding a > > useless middle layer between your platform code and the ds1wm one. > > > I'm OK to use the regulator platform device for ds1wm driver except > for one concern. > ds1wm driver is designed for mfd cell driver. I need to update it as > regulator platform > driver first. cell->enable() / cell->disable() is used to enable clock > for ds1wm driver. > So I need to change the API from cell->enable/disable to clk_enable() > / clk_disable(). > > But the key issue is that there's no common structure for clkdev. Now > clkdev is only > designed for deeply machine depend. > > From my view is that we need a common structure for clkdev. Then mfd driver can > get benefit from this. Some client driver can be written as regulator > platform device. > And mfd driver can use them seamless. What's your opinion? I may be missing your point, but what is preventing you from calling the clock API from drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c, the same way you're calling it from this patch ? Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/