From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: tegra: move fuse code out of arch/arm Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 20:45:32 -0600 Message-ID: <53C88A4C.3070304@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1403558626-13422-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <1403558626-13422-2-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20140707004417.GE8469@quad.lixom.net> <20140708134359.GA23218@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Olof Johansson , Peter De Schrijver Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Arnd Bergmann , "arm-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org" , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "paul-DWxLp4Yu+b8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 07/08/2014 11:47 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Peter De Schrijver > wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 02:44:17AM +0200, Olof Johansson wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:23:45PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>> This branch moves code related to the Tegra fuses out of arch/arm and >>>> into a centralized location which could be shared with ARM64. It also >>>> adds support for reading the fuse data through sysfs. >>> >>> The new/moved misc driver isn't acked by any misc maintainer, so I can't >>> take this branch. >>> >>> I saw no indication from searching the mailing list of that either, >>> so it wasn't just a missed acked-by. >>> >>> I wonder if this code should go under drivers/soc/ instead? >> >> It's modelled after sunxi_sid.c which lives in drivers/misc/eeprom/. >> Originally this driver was also in drivers/misc/eeprom/, but Stephen objected >> and therefore it was moved to drivers/misc/fuse. I think that's the right >> place still. > > I disagree, I think this belongs under drivers/soc. Especially since > you're adding dependencies on this misc driver from other parts of the > kernel / other drivers. > > I also don't like seeing init calls form platform code down into > drivers/misc like you're adding here. Can you please look at doing > that as a regular init call setup? I strongly disagree with using init calls for this kind of thing. There are ordering dependencies between the initialization code that can only be sanely managed by explicitly calling functions in a particular order; there's simply no way to manage this using initcalls. This is exactly why the hooks in the ARM machine descriptors exist...