From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934248AbcISHrC (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:47:02 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f195.google.com ([209.85.192.195]:33289 "EHLO mail-pf0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759477AbcISHqx (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 03:46:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 15:46:37 +0800 From: Peter Chen To: Vaibhav Hiremath Cc: Ulf Hansson , Rob Herring , Peter Chen , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Alan Stern , Mark Brown , Sebastian Reichel , Shawn Guo , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , dwmw3@infradead.org, Mark Rutland , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Koz=C5=82owski?= , Linux USB List , oscar@naiandei.net, =?utf-8?B?UGF3ZcWC?= Moll , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Fabio Estevam , Sascha Hauer , Stephen Boyd , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com, stillcompiling@gmail.com, Philipp Zabel , "Maciej S. Szmigiero" , mka@chromium.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] power: add power sequence library Message-ID: <20160919074637.GA10289@b29397-desktop> References: <20160824085335.GB27233@shlinux2> <20160829111045.GB3736@b29397-desktop> <3a45793f-18d9-0688-d2ab-ef79432c473c@linaro.org> <20160831095220.GA11938@b29397-desktop> <20160902011046.GB11262@shlinux2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 01:09:10PM +0530, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: > > > On Friday 09 September 2016 02:17 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > >[...] > > > >>>>>We had an agreement that keep mmc's pwrseq framework unchanging. > >>>>>Unless Ulf and rob both agree to change. > >>>>Why 2 separate approach for same problem ? > >>>>And I see this as possible duplication of code/functionality :) > >>>How the new kernel compatibles old dts? If we do not need to > >>>consider this problem, the mmc can try to use power sequence library > >>>too in future. > >> > >>I think we should attempt to get both MMC and USB power seq > >>come on one agreement, so that it can be reused. > >That would be nice. Although, to do that you would have to allow some > >DT bindings to be deprecated in the new generic power seq bindings, as > >otherwise you would break existing DTBs. > > > >I guess that is what Rob was objecting to!? > > yeah, thats right. > > So lets adopt similar implementation for USB as well instead of > library, but keeping MMC untouched as of now. > > What I am trying to propose here is, > > Lets have power-sequence framework (similar to V1 of this series), > with, > > pwrseq: Core framework for power sequence. > pwrseq_generic/simple: for all generic control, like reset and clock > pwrseq_emmc: probably duplication of existing code - the idea > here is, all future code should be using this new > binding, so that we can deprecate the > drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq > pwrseq_arche: The usecase which I am dealing with today, which is more > complex in nature. > > Then the respective drivers can add their drivers (if needed) based on > complexity. > > comments ?? The key point here is DT maintainer (Rob) doesn't agree with adding new node for power sequence at dts. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen