On 04-12-13 13:37, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 01:10:54PM +0100, oliver@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Oliver Schinagl <oliver@xxxxxxxxxxx>
This patch adds support for the sunxi series of SoC's by allwinner. It
plugs into the ahci-platform framework.
Note: Currently it uses a somewhat hackish approach that probably needs
a lot more work, but does the same as the IMX SoC's.
Signed-off-by: Olliver Schinagl <oliver@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/ata/ahci-sunxi.txt | 24 ++
drivers/ata/Kconfig | 9 +
drivers/ata/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/ata/ahci_platform.c | 12 +
drivers/ata/ahci_sunxi.c | 305 +++++++++++++++++++++
I'm not really liking the way things are going. Do we really need
separate drivers for each platform ahci implementation. Are they
really that different? Would it be impossible to make ahci_platform
generic enough so that we don't eventually end up with a gazillion
ahci_XXX drivers?
I took the imx driver as example, as I wasn't sure on where to start.
But I don't think it's possible yet without improving ahci_platform as I
suggested in the cover letter. So if ahci_platform needs to be improved,
I guess a separate patch series would be more appropriate?
So would it be acceptable to have this as the 2nd (and last?)
ahci_platform driver and go from there? Or do you want to block new
ahci_XXX drivers until ahci_platform has been improved?
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
