
nicolas.ferre at atmel
Jun 20, 2012, 12:45 AM
Post #6 of 8
(46 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: [GIT PULL] at91: platform data for atmel-mci (for 3.5)
[In reply to]
|
|
On 06/18/2012 03:49 PM, Olof Johansson : > Hi, > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre [at] atmel> wrote: >> On 06/04/2012 05:48 PM, Nicolas Ferre : >>> On 05/31/2012 11:04 PM, Olof Johansson : >>>> Hi Nicolas, >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre [at] atmel >>>> <mailto:nicolas.ferre [at] atmel>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 05/24/2012 05:12 PM, Nicolas Ferre : >>>> > Hi Arnd, hi Olof, >>>> >>>> Ping? >>>> >>>> (or maybe you will have a look at this after the merge window...) >>>> >>>> >>>> So, I looked at this branch yesterday but I wasn't entirely happy with >>>> the number of ifdefs it adds. >>> >>> Unfortunately, this is the usual shape of any devices/boards files on >>> AT91. This amount will be reduced when we remove the old driver and when >>> we move newer/popular devices to Device Tree... >>> >>>> If the idea is to deprecate the old driver, wouldn't it make more sense >>>> to just cut everyone over instead of having both sets of setup in the >>>> kernel? >>> >>> Well, the old driver has existed since a very long time and I think that >>> people are used to it on oldest platforms. This is why we put in place a >>> overlapping period. This way we hope that the transition will be smoother. >>> On the other hand, the old code will be removed in 3.7 so the >>> overlapping period will not be so long. >>> I hope that it will allow people to track bugs if some are remaining and >>> switch to newer driver easily. >> >> Olof, Arnd, >> >> So, do you have made up your mind about this pull request? > > Sorry for the delays in handling this, I should have been quicker at replying. > > That said, the driver is staged for removal in 3.7, and this patch is > 3.6 material at this time. But I think it makes sense to cut every > in-tree board over completely one release before the driver is > removed, and thus not keep the old platform data around for them. > > That way the out-of-tree users still have a one-release grace period, > but everyone with an in-tree board (and the reference platforms) will > move over sooner. I think I would prefer that over having all these > ifdefs in the tree, even if it's just for one release. > > I could be convinced otherwise if there's a good reason though. Either > way, 3.6 is the way to go. Fair enough, we will prepare a patch to remove the old platform data combined with this patch. We will integrate in an "at91-3.6-soc" series/branch that we will submit to you soon. Thanks, best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|