çå: [PATCH] staging: rtsx: Add support for RTS5260

[åé]

> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:54:22AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Oct 2017, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 04:50:35PM +0800, rui_feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > From: rui_feng <rui_feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Add support for new chip rts5260.
> > > > In order to support rts5260ïthe definitions of some internal
> > > > registers and workflow have to be modified and are different from
> > > > its predecessors and OCP function is added for RTS5260.
> > > > So we need this patch to ensure RTS5260 can work.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rui Feng <rui_feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Your from and signed-off-by name does not match :(
> > >
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/mfd/Makefile              |   4 +
> > > >  drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.c            | 127 ++++++-
> > > >  drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.h            |  12 +
> > > >  drivers/staging/Kconfig           |   2 +
> > > >  drivers/staging/rts5260/Kconfig   |   6 +
> > > >  drivers/staging/rts5260/rts5260.c | 748
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  drivers/staging/rts5260/rts5260.h |  45 +++
> > > >  include/linux/mfd/rtsx_pci.h      | 234 +++++++++++-
> > >
> > > I do not see a reason why this is a staging driver.  Where is the
> > > TODO file listing what needs to be done to get it out of staging?
> > > Why can it not just go into the "real" part of the kernel?
> >
> > It's not a staging driver.  Rui's focus appears to be to have this
> > driver accepted into Mainline by hook or by crock.  He's tried MFD,
> > Misc and now Staging!
> 
> Yeah, I've watched it too :)
> 
> > Background:
> >
> > There are a number of drivers in this family which currently reside in
> > MFD.  These were accepted before my time.  After a recent review I've
> > made the decision that these aren't MFD drivers at all.
> >
> > MFD drivers are ones which aid in registering and setting up shared
> > resources for sub-devices which reside on the same piece of silicon.
> > This driver does basically none of that.  Instead it *is* the (what we
> > describe above as) sub-device.  It does everything.
> 
> I agree with your assessment.
> 
> > In the absence of a subsystem which covers this type of device, I
> > suggested Misk as a good location to place these drivers.
> 
> What type of device is this thing?  I can't seem to figure that out.  If we can
> determine that, then we can find the proper place for it in the kernel.
> 
> Rui, what does this hardware do?  What is the interface between the
> hardware and userspace that this driver is creating?
> 
This driver is a pcie driver, it bridge mmc subsystem and memstick subsystem, and it does not deal with userspace.

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 
> ------Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.