Subject: Re: Is there a binding for IORESOURCE_DMA population?
Date: Sunday 17th July 2011 14:57:44 UTC (over 6 years ago)
Shawn Guo wrote: > I was not part of creating imx-ssi. But I guess that Sascha (Cc-ed) > might have strong reasons for creating it rather than reusing fsl-ssi. Not really: http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2009-November/023425.html Sascha created imx-ssi because he didn't even notice my driver was already there! > I really doubt that missing device-tree on ARM platform is the only > reason resulting two ssi drivers. Yes, it is! If we had had device tree support on ARM back then, imx-ssi would never have existed. > I'm also not a fan of consolidating device driver between fsl mpc and > imx family, especially I had a try on eSDHC and saw something ugly > and negative feedback from people. > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/7832 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/8202 That feedback would not have stopped me from merging the two. It looks like some minor concerns that could have been addressed. > So unless someone initiates the consolidation of fsl-ssi and imx-ssi, > I will keep going option b). If the consolidation is reasonable and > possible, it can happen anytime no matter whether device-tree is > added for imx-ssi or not. If you try to update the imx-ssi driver to support device trees, you'll have to convince the ASoC team to override my NAKs. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale