<snip> > >>>> > >>> omap_mmc_platform_data is MMC specific platform data. Why add a SDMA > >>> specific feature capability into it? Even though you add it there, you > >> will > >>> still need to have a cpu check before that can be set in a common > code. > >>> > >> CPU checks are allowed to be in the platform files. That is where such > >> machine/SOC specific differentiation should be done and not in the > device > >> drivers. > >> That way device drivers remains clean and portable. > >> > >> I want to stop this thread here since neither the patch author nor the > >> file > >> maintainer thinks that cpu checks in the device drivers is bad idea. > >> > >> Please decide within yourself and move on. > >> > > > > I am not saying that it is wrong. My point here is that adding this > > particular flag into MMC platform data to differentiate a SDMA specific > > feature which got introduced post certain SOC may not be needed. But you > can > > always post your comments on the list which will be looked at by a wider > > audience and finally the right patch will go in. > Please see [1] for SOC specific feature handling. any reasons we can't > handle it by adding a new feature? > > [1] > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux- > 2.6.git;a=blob;f=arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h#l439 > Yes that makes correct sense. Note that these features will exist on omap4 also so handle in a common way. Surely this will be better than adding a flag which does not belong to MMC platform data. Regards, Madhu > -- > Regards, > Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
