From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] x86, intel_mid: ADC management
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 19:04:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120412180416.GC18049@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F8568A8.5060206@cam.ac.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 817 bytes --]
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:19:04PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 4/11/2012 12:13 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> >Your simple IIO examples would just use the ADC abstraction, your complex
> >IIO examples would use the ADC abstraction *and* layer it with IIO level
> >code that is mixing it with all the other needed work.
> I suspect you'll end up adding more and more to your adc abstraction
> till you actually
> end up with most of IIO. That's effectively what we did... It's
> big because there are
> actually not that many 'simple' adc's out there.
I tend to agree here - I think if we try to establish a strict
separation between the simple and complex abstractions it'd cause more
problems than it will solve trying to split things, and from a hardware
driver level it helps if there's just one upper layer.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-12 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-10 13:20 [PATCH RESEND] x86, intel_mid: ADC management Alan Cox
2012-04-10 13:12 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-10 13:25 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-10 13:33 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-10 13:42 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-10 14:07 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-10 14:15 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-10 15:19 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-10 16:56 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-10 17:58 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-10 19:39 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-10 22:37 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-11 6:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-11 7:44 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-11 15:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-04-11 16:30 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-11 23:46 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-04-12 6:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-11 10:24 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-11 10:38 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-11 10:48 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-11 11:13 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-11 11:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-11 12:30 ` Alan Cox
2012-04-11 12:55 ` Jonathan Cameron
2012-04-12 17:53 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-12 18:04 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2012-04-11 11:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120412180416.GC18049@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jic23@cam.ac.uk \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).