Re: [GIT PULL 3/7] drivers: soc: EXYNOS drivers for v4.6
From: Olof Johansson
Date: Wed Feb 24 2016 - 20:35:32 EST
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> On 25.02.2016 07:22, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 09:34:02AM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Hi Arnd, Kevin and Olof,
>>> This finally moves SROM controller and PMU code to separate
>>> driver under drivers/soc/samsung.
>>> Kind regards,
>>> The following changes since commit 92e963f50fc74041b5e9e744c330dca48e04f08d:
>>> Linux 4.5-rc1 (2016-01-24 13:06:47 -0800)
>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux.git tags/samsung-drivers-soc-srom-pmu-4.6
>>> for you to fetch changes up to 74a6659e8bf193066ba6bf365de66baa897aebb1:
>>> drivers: soc: Add support for Exynos PMU driver (2016-01-25 10:46:59 +0900)
>>> A set of changes adding new drivers under drivers/soc/samsung:
>>> 1. Split code for handling SROM registers out of arm/mach-exynos
>>> in to separate SROM controller driver under drivers/soc/samsung.
>>> The driver will save and restore SROM registers during Suspend
>>> to RAM.
>>> 2. Add to this SROM controller driver support for bank configuration
>>> used by child devices. This allows usage of SMSC9115 Ethernet chip
>>> on SMDK5410 (Exynos5410) directly connected to SROM controller.
>> OMAP has GPMC drivers under drivers/memory. I wonder if SROM should go there
>> too, since it's a quite similar bus.
> I wish I get this feedback before, when we were discussing the SROM
> patches. :/
Yeah, I apologize -- I usually don't have the bandwidth to follow all
discussions, so I have to catch them when the pull requests come in.
I usually look up the discussions, this time I didn't.
> Indeed this sounds reasonable. On some boards the omap-gpmc is used for
> the same purpose: interfacing to smsc,lan9115 (like on SMDK5410).
>> Feel free to respin this without SROM now, so we can get the other pieces in
>> sooner and then revisit the SROM asyncronously. That'll remove the dependencies
>> on DT as well.
> Okay, I'll rebase all drivers/soc branches and respin the pull request
> so PMU driver and other stuff could go in.
> BTW, just in case, although PMU stands for "Power Management Unit" I
> don't think it should be placed under drivers/power because it is not a
> avs/charger/battery/reset driver. Existing power-related drivers are
> under driver/soc (bcm, dove, tegra).
> Re-work of SROM drivers could be started on top of it.
Sounds good, and yes -- those sound appropriate to have under
drivers/soc at least at this time.
(At some point in time we'll have to go through and cleanup
drivers/soc, but we're letting it grow at the moment).