Perhaps I misunderstood what you were suggesting. I thought that, when you said "explicitly manage all their resources", you meant that the driver should know the platform-specific details about clocks and power domains. That is one possible interpretation of the word "explicit". Now I see that you meant that the driver should explicitly call abstracted functions. On 10/23/2012 7:20 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > HI, > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 07:02:09AM -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote: >> On 10/23/2012 12:03 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I much prefer having drivers explicitly manage all their resources, >>> which would mean that pinctrl calls need to be done on probe() and, if >>> necessary, during suspend()/resume(). >> >> >> Per-driver resource management is certainly convenient when you are >> dealing with a single system, but it becomes difficult to maintain for >> drivers that are shared among many platforms. > > why ? look at drivers/usb/dwc3/, we're using that on OMAP, exynos, PCIe > and a couple of different FPGA implementations inside TI. Not to mention > what other licensees of that IP core might have internally. > > So far no problesm with resources at all. > > We have frameworks exactly to hide the differences. > >> The industry trend for many years has been consolidation around a single >> programming model per class of device. For example, SDHCI, EHCI, ATA. >> This trend will only accelerate, as the cost of developing controller IP >> and associated drivers increases. Such drivers need to be as >> platform-agnostic as possible. > > that's why we have pinctrl framework to abstract the details about pin > muxing. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
