From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones) Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 22:21:36 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 6.2/7] MMC: mmci: Enable Device Tree support for ux500 In-Reply-To: <20120503171316.GD14296@sirena.org.uk> References: <4F8BE5B0.4000900@linaro.org> <20120425185747.GC24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA29E46.6040204@linaro.org> <20120503151253.GE897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA2A4A8.9010208@linaro.org> <20120503163008.GF897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA2B4A3.2040402@linaro.org> <20120503164501.GG897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4FA2B98A.6060800@linaro.org> <20120503171316.GD14296@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <4FA2F6E0.1080202@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/05/12 18:13, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:59:54PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: >> On 03/05/12 17:45, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >>> One thing that might help is if the format of these descriptions were >>> changed so that there was one file per subsystem documenting the common >>> options, rather than (eg) every MMC driver documentating the same base >>> options time and time again. > >> I'm afraid that's not really for me to decide, however Grant is on >> CC. Perhaps that's a point he'd like to drive. If he's stopped >> reading this thread and fails to reply, I will endeavor to poke him >> about it while we're in Hong Kong. > > It's what we're already doing for other things where there's a lot of > commonality like regulators, I don't think there's any conroversy, it's > just reminding people to not cut'n'paste. Okay. I'm happy to do a little documentation clean-up once the enablement is complete. There is one more patch-set from me and another from another engineer due, then we can work on tying up some of the loose ends, such as documentation consolidation etc. -- Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead M: +44 77 88 633 515 Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog