Re: [PATCH v1 3/7] mfd: add atmel-lcdc driver

From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/7] mfd: add atmel-lcdc driver
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:15:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180824101533.7728195a@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180815052435.GA6412@dell>

Hi Lee,

On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 06:24:35 +0100
Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:

> > +static const struct mfd_cell lcdc_cells[] = {
> > +	{
> > +		.name = "atmel-lcdc-pwm",
> > +		.of_compatible = "atmel,lcdc-pwm",
> > +	},
> > +	{
> > +		.name = "atmel-lcdc-dc",
> > +		.of_compatible = "atmel,lcdc-display-controller",
> > +	},
> > +};  
> 
> Will you be adding any more devices, or is this the entirety of the
> device?  If the latter, I suggest that this doesn't warrant being an
> MFD.
> 

Is there a lower limit to define when an MFD is recommended, or is it
that you find a PWM (driving a backlight) and a display controller
close enough to be implemented in a single driver?

I personally prefer the separation we have today, because I can then
place the drivers where they belong (PWM subsystem and DRM subsystem)
and the respective maintainers know about these drivers.

Regards,

Boris
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel