lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 08/12] i2c: designware: Introduce platform drivers glue layer interface
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 04:16:05PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 5/21/20 5:37 AM, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:46:11PM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > On 5/10/20 12:50 PM, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > Seeing the DW I2C platform driver is getting overcomplicated with a lot of
> > > > vendor-specific configs let's introduce a glue-layer interface so new
> > > > platforms which equipped with Synopsys Designware APB I2C IP-core would
> > > > be able to handle their peculiarities in the dedicated objects.
> > > >
> > > Comment to this patch and patches 9/12 and 12/12:
> > >
> > > Currently i2c-designware-platdrv.c is about 500 lines of code so I don't
> > > think it's too overcomplicated. But I feel we have already too many Kconfig
> > > options and source modules for i2c-designware and obviously would like to
> > > push back a little from adding more.
> > >
> > > I don't think i2c-designware-platdrv.c becomes yet too complicated if Baikal
> > > related code is added there, perhaps under #ifdef CONFIG_OF like MSCC Ocelot
> > > code is currently.
> >
> > Well, it's up to you to decide, what solution is more suitable for you to
> > maintain. My idea of detaching the MSCC and Baikal-T1 code to the dedicated
> > source files was to eventually move the whole i2c-designware-* set of files
> > into a dedicated directory drivers/i2c/buses/dw as it's done for some others
> > Synopsys DesignWare controllers: drivers/pci/controller/dwc/, drivers/usb/dwc2,
> > drivers/usb/dwc3, drivers/net/ethernet/synopsys/ . If you think, that it's too
> > early for Dw I2C code to live in a dedicated directory, fine with me. I can
> > merge the MSCC and Baikal-T1 code back into the i2c-designware-platdrv.c .
> > So what's your final word in this matter?
> >
> I think sub directory decision under each subsystem is more subsystem rather
> than vendor/driver specific. Good point anyway.
>
> For this patchset I'd like more if changes are done to
> i2c-designware-platdrv.c since it's not too complicated yet :-)
>
> If it starts to look too messy in the future then it's time split I think.

Ok. I'll merge the MSCC back and add Baikal-T1 System I2C support into the
DW I2C platform driver.

-Sergey

>
> Jarkko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-26 22:39    [W:0.065 / U:3.948 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site