On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Magnus Damm wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Guennadi Liakhovetski >> <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Sun, 13 Mar 2011, Magnus Damm wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski >> >> <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > TMIO MMC chips contain an SD / SDIO IP core from Panasonic, similar to >> >> > the one, used in MN5774 and other MN57xx controllers. These IP cores are >> >> > included in many multifunction devices, in sh-mobile chips from Renesas, >> >> > in the latter case they can also use DMA. Some sh-mobile implementations >> >> > also have some other specialities, that MFD-based solutions don't have. >> >> > This makes supporting all these features in a monolithic driver inconveniet >> >> > and error-prone. This patch splits the driver into 3 parts: the core, >> >> > the MFD glue and the DMA support. In case of a modular build, two modules >> >> > will be built: mmc_tmio_core and mmc_tmio. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx> >> >> > --- >> What's the reason behind creating tmio_mmc_core.o instead of simply >> having tmio_mmc_pio.o + tmio_mmc_dma.o? That must be the most >> straightforward solution, no? > > You mean two kernel modules ..._pio.ko and ..._dma.ko? but why?... I don't > see any advantages in such a split, besides, they are calling into each > other ATM. Yeah, two kernel modules. That would be the cleanest IMO. But it's not such a big deal though, if you think this split is the best and everyone else is happy then I'm fine as well. Thanks, / magnus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
