On 2023/8/26 04:02, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Hi!
first of all, thank you for reworking your driver to share common code
with the WMT driver. This effort is much appreciated and we are close to
go, I think. But some remarks.
+config I2C_VIAI2C_COMMON
+ tristate
+
config I2C_WMT
tristate "Wondermedia WM8xxx SoC I2C bus support"
depends on ARCH_VT8500 || COMPILE_TEST
+ select I2C_VIAI2C_COMMON
help
Say yes if you want to support the I2C bus on Wondermedia 8xxx-series
SoCs.
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile b/drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile
index af56fe2c75c0..b7e20c3531b5 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Makefile
@@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_TEGRA_BPMP) += i2c-tegra-bpmp.o
obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_UNIPHIER) += i2c-uniphier.o
obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_UNIPHIER_F) += i2c-uniphier-f.o
obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_VERSATILE) += i2c-versatile.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_VIAI2C_COMMON) += i2c-viai2c-common.o
obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_WMT) += i2c-wmt.o
i2c-octeon-objs := i2c-octeon-core.o i2c-octeon-platdrv.o
obj-$(CONFIG_I2C_OCTEON) += i2c-octeon.o
I'd prefer to link the core object to the driver object like pasemi or
octeon do. Or is there an argument for having a seperate module?
There are two main reasons:
1. I checked the MAINTAINERS section related to ARM/VT8500,
Found that the entire ARM/VT8500 ARCHITECTURE is currently
unmaintained, maybe one day it will be removed from the kernel.
So I think it might be better as a separate module.
2. In addition, if not separated from wmt, the driver would
become a bit confusing and difficult to maintain.
Regards!
