Re: [[PATCH v2]] OMAP: omap4-panda: add WiLink shared transport power functions

From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Cc: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>,
	"Cousson, Benoit" <b-cousson@ti.com>,
	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [[PATCH v2]] OMAP: omap4-panda: add WiLink shared transport power functions
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:05:49 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130118180548.GR14149@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130118175408.GC1035@arwen.pp.htv.fi>

* Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com> [130118 09:57]:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 09:36:35AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com> [130118 01:03]:
> > > On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 15:16 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > * Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com> [130117 10:04]:
> > > > > But this patch is pretty small and simple, so why not include it to at
> > > > > least fix the breakage in 3.7 and 3.8? Whether you take it or not now
> > > > > won't make any difference in the 5k LOC in these kernel versions.
> > > > 
> > > > Well we are planning to drop the non-DT support for omap4 as soon as it's
> > > > usable with DT. For omap4 we are only carrying SDP and panda support to
> > > > make this transition easier. The only bindings missing AFAIK are wl12xx and
> > > > USB.
> > > 
> > > In my view this is a regression and it should be fixed with as simple a
> > > patch as possible.  The alternative to my solution is to revert the
> > > patch that removed the enable/disable from the ti-st driver *and* fix
> > > u-boot, because if it doesn't mux the UART2 pins properly (and it
> > > doesn't) the shared transport still won't work.
> > 
> > Fixing the muxing here makes sense naturally as we cannot do that in the driver
> > until we've flipped things over to use DT.
> > 
> > But I don't think we should fix the driver regression by adding more platform
> > callbacks as we are getting rid of them anyways.
> 
> it's not adding more callbacks, solely implementing them as it should
> have been done on Pavan's original patch.

It certainly is adding new callback functions to board-*.c files looking
at the diffstat :)

IMHO the right fix is to revert eccf2979 that caused the regression and then
adding the muxing to the board-*.c file(s).

It's OK for the driver to call the standard GPIO functions, and those will
be needed in the driver for the DT case anyways.

Regards,

Tony