Messages in this thread | | | From | "Subhasish Ghosh" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 13/13] tty: pruss SUART driver | Date | Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:05:53 +0530 |
| |
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 >
| |