Messages in this thread | | | From | Ulf Hansson <> | Date | Mon, 8 Jul 2019 12:21:52 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mmc: remove another TMIO MMC variant usdhi6rol0.c |
| |
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 09:04, Lars Persson <lists@bofh.nu> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 12:50 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 03:16:11PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > (Added Lars Persson, Guennadi Liakhovetski) > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 3:06 PM Masahiro Yamada > > > <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote: > > > > > > This needs Ack from Renesas. > > > But, I do not know if TMIO folks are sure about this driver, though. > > > (If they had been sure about it, they should not have duplicated the driver > > > in the first place.) > > > > ... and from the original mail: > > > > > Delete this driver now. Please re-implement it based on tmio_mmc_core.c > > > if needed. > > > > I was never happy with this driver existing, yet I never knew which HW > > platform needed this, so I didn't touch it. But I'd like to see it go in > > favor of merging with the TMIO code base. > > > > > > > > Perhaps, some code snippets in this driver might be useful for cleaning > > > tmio_mmc. It will stay in git history forever, and you can dig for it > > > whenever you need it. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> > > > > I double checked there is no user in the current tree. I also searched > > the web and did not find any out-of-tree user or even a reference of it. > > > > So, for now: > > > > Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> > > > > But this seriously needs an Ack from Shimoda-san or Morimoto-san. And > > maybe Guennadi has remarks, too? > > > > So let me tell you the real use of this driver. > > It is used by Axis Communications in our Artpec-6 chips that will be > around for at least 5 years in active development at our side. The SoC > is upstreamed, but the upstreaming effort was side-tracked before the > usdhi6rol0 was added to the devicetree. > > I do agree with you guys that we should not keep two drivers for the > same IP so there should be an effort to unify the drivers. In the mean > time, we can make the connection with Axis more explicit by assigning > us as maintainer and pushing the device tree entries.
To me, this sounds like a reasonable good plan. Although, we need a formal maintainer rather than just a company name.
If you or anybody at Axis can send a patch for MAINTAINERS, that would serve as commitment that I would be happy with.
Additionally, of course, the sooner we can get things moving on converting usdhi6rol0 into using the tmio family driver, the better.
Kind regards Uffe
| |