From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:06:18 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 5/8] mfd: Move pm8xxx-irq.c contents into only driver that uses it In-Reply-To: <20131211093552.GG16780@lee--X1> References: <1386718523-2587-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <1386718523-2587-6-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20131211093552.GG16780@lee--X1> Message-ID: <52AA092A.3040605@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 12/11/13 01:35, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> The pm8xxx-irq.c code is practically mandatory given that the >> pm8921-core driver will WARN about it missing and the Kconfig >> marks it as default y when a PM8xxx chips is enabled. The only >> reason the file was split out was because we planned to support >> other pm8xxx chips with different pm8xxx-core.c files. Now that >> we have DT on ARM this isn't necessary because we should be able >> to support all the ssbi based PM8xxx chips in one driver and one >> file with no data bloat. Let's move this code into the only >> driver that uses it right now (pm8921) so that it's always compiled when >> needed. In the future we can rename pm8921-core.c to something >> more generic. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd >> --- >> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 10 -- >> drivers/mfd/pm8921-core.c | 349 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> drivers/mfd/pm8xxx-irq.c | 371 ---------------------------------------------- > If you're going to take this approach (which I'm fine with unless > there are likely to be anymore incarnations of pm8xxx chips?), I think > you should also clean-up the header in this patch. > > include/linux/mfd/pm8xxx/irq.h > Thanks. I'll remove the header and resend. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation