From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80FF9C433E0 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 20:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F16C20722 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 20:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=walle.cc header.i=@walle.cc header.b="vkg/zj/0" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726128AbgENUp7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2020 16:45:59 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37964 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725975AbgENUp6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2020 16:45:58 -0400 Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (ssl.serverraum.org [IPv6:2a01:4f8:151:8464::1:2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A2A2C061A0C; Thu, 14 May 2020 13:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ssl.serverraum.org (web.serverraum.org [172.16.0.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.serverraum.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF3CB22EEB; Thu, 14 May 2020 22:45:53 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=walle.cc; s=mail2016061301; t=1589489154; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=DMXKBlWL/MST7cL34EcyY2r7dUnEYA7BplVDp3fsnk0=; b=vkg/zj/0PDSbf5X0pK+in32oGplSgPjZpIyY9VFe7AbF/2ZsjfhevzzkEFvlj0qRy3JA0c 1CSKjkXkWnIGZ95mLlXpOIqKRhQvgXP6n4LMjJosWwuh08bDDGHGGq619bZyreTcqDdXnr T5BtNH3gx2QelwgM2PzR7k5O5g5eGkA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 22:45:53 +0200 From: Michael Walle To: Mark Brown Cc: Robin Murphy , Andy Shevchenko , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , Rob Herring , Jean Delvare , Guenter Roeck , Lee Jones , Thierry Reding , =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= , Wim Van Sebroeck , Shawn Guo , Li Yang , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Marc Zyngier , Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] mfd: mfd-core: Don't overwrite the dma_mask of the child device In-Reply-To: <20200428152543.GI5677@sirena.org.uk> References: <20200423174543.17161-1-michael@walle.cc> <20200423174543.17161-3-michael@walle.cc> <20200428124548.GS185537@smile.fi.intel.com> <3cd3705a-4f48-6a46-e869-3ee11dc17323@arm.com> <20200428142938.GX185537@smile.fi.intel.com> <6ccad285-7b5f-3037-d4d5-ff4d9571b612@arm.com> <20200428152543.GI5677@sirena.org.uk> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.4 Message-ID: <8fb998f882938680d98f1c2f6f8254c1@walle.cc> X-Sender: michael@walle.cc Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org Am 2020-04-28 17:25, schrieb Mark Brown: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 03:49:49PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > >> For better or worse, the platform bus is the dumping ground for random >> crap, >> so we just have to deal with all the abstraction breakage that leaks >> out of >> that. > > The reason we're using the platform bus for this is that historically > people were creating buses which were essentially carbon copies of the > platform bus with the name changed and it was felt that rather than > duplicate code it was better to just use platform devices with no MMIO > ranges defined. If there's some assumptions about DMA for platform > devices floating about somewhere it might be reasonable to revisit this > and create a non-DMA variant of platform devices since there is a > meaningful difference. Was there any conclusion? Should I keep or drop this patch in the next version of this series? -- -michael