[PATCH 0/5] consolidate sdhci pltfm & OF drivers and get them self registered

Grant Likely grant.likely at secretlab.ca
Thu Mar 31 04:56:39 UTC 2011


On Mar 30, 2011 10:23 PM, "Shawn Guo" <shawn.guo at freescale.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 04:48:46PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > Here are what the patch set does.
> >
> > * Remove .probe and .remove hooks from sdhci-pltfm.c and make it be
> >   a pure common helper function providers.
> > * Add .probe and .remove hooks for sdhci pltfm drivers sdhci-cns3xxx,
> >   sdhci-dove, sdhci-tegra, and sdhci-esdhc-imx to make them self
> >   registered with calling helper functions created above.
> > * Migrate the use of sdhci_of_host and sdhci_of_data to
> >   sdhci_pltfm_host and sdhci_pltfm_data, so that OF version host and
> >   data structure works can be saved, and pltfm version works for both
> >   cases.
> > * Add OF common helper stuff into sdhci-pltfm.c, and make OF version
> >   sdhci drivers sdhci-of-esdhc and sdhci-of-hlwd become self
> >   registered as well, so that sdhci-of-core.c and sdhci-of.h can be
> >   removed.
> > * Consolidate the OF and pltfm esdhc drivers into one with sharing
> >   the same pair of .probe and .remove hooks.  As a result,
> >   sdhci-esdhc-imx.c and sdhci-of-esdhc.c go away, while
> >   sdhci-esdhc.c comes in and works for both MPCxxx and i.MX.
> > * Eliminate include/linux/mmc/sdhci-pltfm.h with moving stuff into
> >   drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.h.
> >
> > And the benefits we gain from the changes are:
> >
> > * Get the sdhci device driver follow the Linux trend that driver
> >   makes the registration by its own.
> > * sdhci-pltfm.c becomes simple and clean as it only has common helper
> >   stuff there now.
> > * All sdhci device specific things are going back its own driver.
> > * The dt and non-dt drivers are consolidated to use the same pair of
> >   .probe and .remove hooks.
> > * SDHCI driver for Freescale eSDHC controller found on both MPCxxx
> >   and i.MX platforms is consolidated to use the same one .probe
> >   function.
> >
> > The patch set works against the tree below, and was only tested on
> > i.mx51 babbage board, all other targets were build tested.
> >
> >   git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6.git devicetree/test
> >
> > Comments are welcomed and appreciated.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Shawn
> >
> > PS: The first patch is a squashing of the patch set below, which was
> > posted for review a few days back.
> >
> >   [PATCH 0/5] make sdhci device drivers self registered
> >
> > Some patches in this series are relatively large, involving more
> > changes than expected, I chose to not split considering they are
> > logically integral, and doing so can reduce the patch quantity much,
> > and make bisect much easier.  But sorry for that it makes reviewers'
> > life harder.
> >
> > Shawn Guo (5):
> >       mmc: sdhci: make sdhci-pltfm device drivers self registered
> >       mmc: sdhci: eliminate sdhci_of_host and sdhci_of_data
> >       mmc: sdhci: make sdhci-of device drivers self registered
> >       mmc: sdhci: consolidate sdhci-of-esdhc and sdhci-esdhc-imx
> >       mmc: sdhci: merge two sdhci-pltfm.h into one
> >
> >  drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig           |   71 ++++---
> >  drivers/mmc/host/Makefile          |   17 +-
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-cns3xxx.c   |   68 ++++++-
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-dove.c      |   69 ++++++-
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c |  149 -------------
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.c     |  412
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-core.c   |  247 ---------------------
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c  |   89 --------
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-hlwd.c   |   89 +++++++-
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of.h        |   42 ----
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c     |  251 +++++++++-------------
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.h     |   36 +++-
> >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-tegra.c     |  187 ++++++++++-------
> >  include/linux/mmc/sdhci-pltfm.h    |   35 ---
> >  14 files changed, 912 insertions(+), 850 deletions(-)
> > --
>
> Any comments?  Is this the right direction to move?

I think it is, but I'll try to get you a full review tomorrow.

g.

>
> --
> Regards,
> Shawn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linaro-dev mailing list
> linaro-dev at lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-dev/attachments/20110330/c4a5bd10/attachment.html>


More information about the linaro-dev mailing list