On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 09:55:08AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > 2014-05-29 8:03 GMT-07:00 Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Thu, 29 May 2014, Alex Smith wrote: > > > >> From: David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> The device tree will *always* have correct ehci/ohci clock > >> configuration, so use it. This allows us to remove a big chunk of > >> platform configuration code from octeon-platform.c. > > > > Instead of doing this, how about moving the octeon2_usb_clocks_start() > > and _stop() routines into octeon-platform.c, and then using the > > ehci-platform and ohci-platform drivers instead of special-purpose > > ehci-octeon and ohci-octeon drivers? > > How about they get their changes in now, and eventually they cleanup > the octeon driver in the future? Nope, sorry, we don't do that for kernel development, you know that. > My personal experience with that sort of request, is that I had to > come up with 50+ patches to clean up the Kconfig mess that USB drivers > had back then and I still have not re-submitted the bcm63xx USB > patchset. Well, that's not our fault you haven't resent them :) > It is fair to pinpoint what *should* be improved and what the next > steps could look like, it is not fair to ask people submitting changes > to come up with a much bigger task before their patches can be merged. Of course it is, that's how we do Linux development, again, you know this. greg k-h
