On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 10:59:33AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > Hi Stefan, Arnd, > > (I'm trimming the Cc list and adding Thierry and Maxime to the loop): > > On 11/06/2014 04:47 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > [..] > >> > >> i don't have a answer to this question, but how about changing fsl_ocotp driver > >> to driver/soc/mxs/fuse with a similiar binary interface like the tegra ones. > >> > >> Does it make sense to you? > > > > I haven't looked at the drivers, so I don't know if the tegra interface > > is any better or worse than the others. Changing everyone to have the same > > interface is definitely a good idea, but of course only if the unified > > interface is a good one ;-) > > > > I'm in the process of finding a suitable upstream path for a new eFuse driver > for fuses used on Imagination Technologies SoCs. > > This was our last proposal, which follows Tegra's work: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg59246.html > > However, Arnd was reluctant to take yet another efuse driver under drivers/soc > and proposed instead to try to find a unified API. We've had numerous fuse > drivers (tegra, sunxi, imx and img) appearing, so his concern certainly makes > sense. > > I've talked to Arnd on IRC and we agreed to create a new directory > drivers/efuse. As a first step we would just move the tegra driver, > and add the new drivers (img on my side, and possibly mxs on Stefan's). > Perhaps we would also pull the sunxi_sid driver as well. > > Having the drivers together would allow us to come up with a unified API > as follow up work. > > How does this sound? If you have no objections to this, I can go ahead and > try to prepare some RFCs. No objections from me. Adding Peter and linux-tegra for visibility. Thierry
Attachment:
pgpg3LLkOfsMF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
