On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 02:13:37PM +0000, Shenwei Wang wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Shawn Guo [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: 2015年7月27日 8:41 > > To: Wang Shenwei-B38339 > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Huang > > Yongcai-B20788; [email protected]; > > [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] irqchip: imx-gpcv2: IMX GPCv2 driver for wakeup > > sources > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:07:38PM -0500, Shenwei Wang wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/soc/imx/gpcv2.h b/include/soc/imx/gpcv2.h new > > > file mode 100644 index 0000000..73d6e75 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/include/soc/imx/gpcv2.h > > > > I do not like this header, which couples imx7d irqchip and pm driver so > > much. Can you please elaborate why we have to have this header? > > PM driver does depend on the irqchip driver. It needs some input like enabled > irqs and > wakeup irqs to decide which module to be powered off in low power states. I > am also > considering if the header file could be removed or not. So far it seems a > common place > to define a structure which is used in both drivers is still required.
Please be more specific. Trimming the header down to the macros and structures/fields that are necessary to be in the header might be a good idea. And then we can go through them one by one to see if there is a way to avoid them being in the header. Shawn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
