On Friday 11 April 2014 13:09:08 Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:25:03PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > Why do you have to enumerate the interrupts here? Can't you just > > put all the numbers into the DT nodes of the devices using them? > > > In general, I would say that the mfd driver should not care about > > what is connected to it. > > This then means that all the machines using the device need to define > the interrupt table and have the MFD cells represented in the DT which > means encoding Linux abstractions into the DT. > > In cases where the device is also used with ACPI or platform data that's > a definite issue since they have different idioms. That applies less to > PMICs tightly bound to particular SoCs but is an issue in general, not > all the world is DT. > > There's also issues here with us changing our subsystems. Things like > clocks are a bit indistinct at present, they're sort of floating between > clock and other subsystems. We've also done things like invent extcon, > making completely new subdevices. Keeping the data out of DT avoids > problems when this happens. The balance changes a bit if there are > clearly reusable IPs within the device but sadly hardware designers > don't always give us that and even then sometimes we don't want to use > them like that. Ok, fair enough. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
