From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com (Sergei Shtylyov) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 02:02:34 +0400 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: shmobile: use common platform header for HPB-DMAC In-Reply-To: References: <201306300243.57180.sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> <201306300245.58486.sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> Message-ID: <51E865FA.9000706@cogentembedded.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello. On 07/02/2013 08:59 AM, Magnus Damm wrote: >> From: Max Filippov >> Use previously empty to declare HPB-DMA slave IDs. >> Signed-off-by: Max Filippov >> [Sergei: changed the guard macro name, fixed comment, extended copyright.] >> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/dma.h | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > Thanks for your patch. Can you please explain the reason why you put > this shared information under mach/? I'm afraid that's more a question to the original author, Phil Edworthy. He put this stuff into . > From my point of view we should really have as few special things as > possible under mach/. Starting to share DMA stuff here looks special. > I would like mach-shmobile to be as standard as possible (basically > only ARM code in the future), and in the case we have I/O devices or > other IOMMUs or DMA controllers then we should use include/linux or > that recently added platform data directory if needed. We need to make > sure that our headers stay compatible with multiplatform support. > I realize you may want to share this header between multiple SoCs, but > I really want to avoid creating local common code under arch/arm/ that > has nothing to do with ARM. Also, this is IMO a total non-issue, > instead of merging code and making back porting more difficult for any > particular SoC, then how about spending effort on the ling term > instead, like DMA DT? > So my recommendation is to keep this information together with each > SoC. And also work on DT. In between have a coffee or work on DT, but > please do not spend time on merging short term per-SoC information and > making back porting more difficult. OK. DT would be a next step I guess. > Thanks, > / magnus WBR, Sergei