On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 01:18:05PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:11:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Surely that's just an implementation detail? As I understand your > > description the microcontroller is hiding the control interfaces of the > > other things it controls so the function is pretty similar. > No, it's a question of whether drivers/mfd is right. The "shovel > everything that doesn't fit elsewhere into drivers/mfd" approach > is just creating yet another problem, just like drivers/i2c/chips > is percieved to be. The only difference is that it becomes someone > elses problem. Well, my thinking was that it looks like you've got a bunch of subsystem-specific drivers for this chip with a core driver managing shared resources like I/O with the device. To my mind that's pretty much the use case for MFD. As far as general dumping grounds goes we already have drivers/misc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
