lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 13/13] tty: pruss SUART driver
    Date
    Hello,

    Anything regarding this.

    --------------------------------------------------
    From: "Subhasish Ghosh" <subhasish@mistralsolutions.com>
    Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:00 AM
    To: "Greg KH" <gregkh@suse.de>; "Alan Cox" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
    Cc: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>; <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>;
    "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>; <sachi@mistralsolutions.com>;
    <davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com>; <nsekhar@ti.com>; "open
    list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; <m-watkins@ti.com>; "Stalin
    Srinivasan" <stalin.s@mistralsolutions.com>
    Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/13] tty: pruss SUART driver

    > I could not follow the recommendations clearly.
    > This is just to clarify.
    >
    > Currently, I have the following files for the suart implementation:
    >
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_api.h
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_err.h
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_regs.h
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_board.h
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_mcasp.h
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_utils.h
    >
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_api.c
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart.c
    > drivers/tty/serial/da8xx_pruss/pruss_suart_utils.c
    >
    > Of these, I will be removing pruss_suart_err.h as part of the Linux error
    > code cleanup.
    > But, I need to keep at least pruss_suart_board.h as a separate file, as
    > this defines
    > configurations which will be often modified by users, I don't want to mix
    > it with other files.
    >
    > Should I combine rest of the headers into a single file ? and keep the
    > other three .c files under "drivers/tty/serial/"
    > and remove the da8xx_pruss directory altogether.
    >
    >
    > --------------------------------------------------
    > From: "Greg KH" <gregkh@suse.de>
    > Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 8:07 PM
    > To: "Subhasish Ghosh" <subhasish@mistralsolutions.com>
    > Cc: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>;
    > <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; "Thomas Gleixner"
    > <tglx@linutronix.de>; "Alan Cox" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>;
    > <sachi@mistralsolutions.com>;
    > <davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com>; <nsekhar@ti.com>; "open
    > list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; <m-watkins@ti.com>
    > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/13] tty: pruss SUART driver
    >
    >> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 02:12:32PM +0530, Subhasish Ghosh wrote:
    >>> Hello,
    >>>
    >>> I had kept separate files to affirm the modularity and ease of
    >>> portability of the system.
    >>>
    >>> There are three different interfaces,
    >>> 1. The Linux driver interface
    >>> 2. The PRU control interface
    >>> 3. The McASP serializer interface.
    >>>
    >>> To maintain modularity, I had classified the files respectively as :
    >>> 1. pruss_suart.c
    >>> 2. pruss_suart_api.c
    >>> 3. pruss_suart_utils.c
    >>>
    >>> This is not a single device which can be expressed as a single file,
    >>> but functionally different devices logically cascaded together to
    >>> work in unison.
    >>>
    >>> We use the PRU for packet processing, but the actual data is
    >>> transmitted/received through the
    >>> McASP, which we use as a serializer.
    >>>
    >>> I feel to combine these disparate functionalities into a single file
    >>> will not
    >>>
    >>> 1. Help better understanding the device. I mean, why should a TTY
    >>> UART driver be aware of the McASP or the PRU.
    >>> 2. In case of a bug in the API layer or McASP, the driver need not
    >>> be touched, thus improve maintainability.
    >>> 3. If we need to port it to another Linux version, just editing the
    >>> driver file should suffice, this will reduce bugs while porting.
    >>
    >> If your code is in the kernel tree, you do not need to ever port it to a
    >> new version, as it will happen automatically as new kernels are
    >> released, so this really isn't anything to worry about.
    >>
    >>> To me, combining all of these into a single file only creates a
    >>> mess. This is the reason I had separated them into different files!!
    >>> I don't understand why should it be better to have all of these into
    >>> a single file.
    >>
    >> As Alan stated, just use 3 files in the directory with the other
    >> drivers, you don't need a subdir for something small like this.
    >>
    >> thanks,
    >>
    >> greg k-h
    >


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-02-23 14:37    [W:0.030 / U:0.208 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site