From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2013 14:01:12 +0200 From: Maxime Ripard To: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: MTD EEPROM support and driver integration Message-ID: <20130706120112.GA11069@lukather> References: <20130705201118.GM2959@lukather> <201307060033.13259.arnd@arndb.de> <20130706082804.GZ2959@lukather> <5811519.oHVuMujf0I@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5811519.oHVuMujf0I@wuerfel> Cc: Artem Bityutskiy , oliver@schinagl.nl, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Shawn Guo , David Woodhouse , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I'm not exactly sure on what happened to the previous mail that has been sent empty, but anyway: On Sat, Jul 06, 2013 at 11:18:00AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Saturday 06 July 2013 10:28:04 Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > a) like interrupts, regs, dmas, clocks, pinctrl, reset, pwm: fixed pr= operty names > > >=20 > > > regmap =3D <&at25 0xstart 0xlen>; > > > regmap-names =3D "mac-address"; > > >=20 > > > b) like gpio, regulator: variable property names > > >=20 > > > mac-storage =3D <&at25 0xstart 0xlen>; > > >=20 > > > It's unfortunate that we already have examples of both. They are larg= ely > > > equivalent, but the tendency is towards the first. > >=20 > > I don't have a strong feeling for one against another, so whatever works > > best. Both solutions will be a huge improvement anyway=20 > >=20 > > Just out of curiosity, is there any advantages besides having a fixed > > property name to the first solution? >=20 > I think it's mostly for consistency: trying to get most subsystems to > do it the same way to make it easier for people to write dts files. >=20 > A lesser point is that it simplifies the driver code if you don't > have to pass a name. So that leave us with mainly one path to achieve this goal: - Add a regmap-mtd backend - Add DT parsing code for regmap - Move the EEPROM drivers from misc to mtd What other option would we have? I also thought about writing an EEPROM framework of its own, but the line is really thin between a large EEPROM and say a small SPI dataflash, which would make it pretty hard to choose between such a framework and MTD. Thanks, Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR2AcHAAoJEBx+YmzsjxAgccMP/0YOuF1pBSNVfSKRyHXktDel IgCnTkClK5/8fV4BMF7vxvSQGZUGQc0uVBfv/mzWOFkwMvnCeRCfW9UgMs6hiH36 Mqv95zTS5tzpoYYWtcc5hPw6eYbUzHpRoobZ7X29o06jQCQHddqeo6XZJJXyT+Zy A2NQ1uopC42SCCYMsGNXolPnOD8Kw/RTCDke4iaC0f6kRkb+SFXMiP6uEeryryJL +2aaQY/6BeqM61wRpRzWjOSnt+WXc3euRQk/zOjnAvtaiKhHCeaJWWwWGIwtAaK8 TeMwAj34263rPmymvH6UmVb+TKG0Ez/WQsjbepNoy7x9Vp039LwixTgKEUXroBY7 uajLR0cdiOS9vBeBNP8Iy05AeveULirIFexgqH2phJRybIj6SgKIPxlOCFDjRTQt D38y2uuS5HLOmVKx0sjriHrN9YUF8Yt9YGdk7HOM3Y5aAM7RfCGzl5o6SLtC8I3N ongzNUJodQVxdfwMsl8YTx8XjAYs94PJwlJYdO3qPB0huARxBf6jkALrDfQlYOJe XsMcehjpFzGCHnOG7/ivmpO+KyNH8l8BVIApsf3K9XR/h+i5d2piu2yVcp/zrbYX muML1uofcupnddbSE3lvQIZScHR8KYeqpi+CCBVbM/AIvHds21iK6ZLq7+nh3i/S VcAec4Lue9vP3Hfcgrk6 =+npG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2--