-----Original Message----- From: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 8:00 AM To: RAVULAPATI, VISHNU VARDHAN RAO Vishnuvardhanrao.Ravulapati@amd.com Cc: RAVULAPATI, VISHNU VARDHAN RAO Vishnuvardhanrao.Ravulapati@amd.com; Deucher, Alexander Alexander.Deucher@amd.com; Liam Girdwood lgirdwood@gmail.com; Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org; Jaroslav Kysela perex@perex.cz; Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.com; Mukunda, Vijendar Vijendar.Mukunda@amd.com; Maruthi Srinivas Bayyavarapu Maruthi.Bayyavarapu@amd.com; Mehta, Sanju Sanju.Mehta@amd.com; Colin Ian King colin.king@canonical.com; Dan Carpenter dan.carpenter@oracle.com; moderated list:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC AUDIO POWER MANAGEM... alsa-devel@alsa-project.org; open list linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] ASoC: amd: Registering device endpoints using MFD framework
On Tue, 01 Oct 2019, vishnu wrote:
Hi Jones,
I am very Thankful to your review comments.
Actually The driver is not totally based on MFD. It just uses mfd_add_hotplug_devices() and mfd_remove_devices() for adding the devices automatically.
Remaining code has nothing to do with MFD framework.
So I thought It would not break the coding style and moved ahead by using the MFD API by adding its header file.
If it is any violation of coding standard then I can move it to drivers/mfd.
This patch could be a show stopper for us.Please suggest us how can we move ahead ASAP.
Either move the MFD parts to drivers/mfd, or stop using the MFD API.
There are more drivers outside of drivers/mfd using this API than drivers in drivers/mfd. In a lot of cases it doesn't make sense to move the driver to drivers/mfd.
Alex
-- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog