From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Move and rename HP watchdog timer driver Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:56:58 -0700 Message-ID: <5226CBAA.10002@roeck-us.net> References: <1378272591-9755-1-git-send-email-matthew.garrett@nebula.com> <5226C880.8010704@roeck-us.net> <1378273901.11730.53.camel@x230> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1378273901.11730.53.camel@x230> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Thomas.Mingarelli@hp.com" , "toshi.kani@hp.com" , "wim@iguana.be" , "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" , "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org On 09/03/2013 10:51 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, 2013-09-03 at 22:43 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >> If that is the case, wouldn't it make more sense to have separate drivers, >> one per functionality, plus an mfd driver to bind them all together ? > > It'd be an option, but I don't think there's a huge benefit - the > functionality's reasonably related and there's no real internal bus > architecture on the device. > On the other side it is much cleaner. drivers/mfd/lpc_sch.c and drivers/mfd/lpc_ich.c are good examples. Guenter