Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] power: add power sequence library

[Vaibhav Hiremath]

On Monday 19 September 2016 01:16 PM, Peter Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 01:09:10PM +0530, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote:
> > On Friday 09 September 2016 02:17 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > > > We had an agreement that keep mmc's pwrseq framework unchanging.
> > > > > > > Unless Ulf and rob both agree to change.
> > > > > > Why 2 separate approach for same problem ?
> > > > > > And I see this as possible duplication of code/functionality :)
> > > > > How the new kernel compatibles old dts? If we do not need to
> > > > > consider this problem, the mmc can try to use power sequence library
> > > > > too in future.
> > > > I think we should attempt to get both MMC and USB power seq
> > > > come on one agreement, so that it can be reused.
> > > That would be nice. Although, to do that you would have to allow some
> > > DT bindings to be deprecated in the new generic power seq bindings, as
> > > otherwise you would break existing DTBs.
> > >
> > > I guess that is what Rob was objecting to!?
> > yeah, thats right.
> >
> > So lets adopt similar implementation for USB as well instead of
> > library, but keeping MMC untouched as of now.
> >
> > What I am trying to propose here is,
> >
> > Lets have power-sequence framework (similar to V1 of this series),
> > with,
> >
> > pwrseq: Core framework for power sequence.
> > pwrseq_generic/simple: for all generic control, like reset and clock
> > pwrseq_emmc: probably duplication of existing code - the idea
> >                            here is, all future code should be using this new
> >                            binding, so that we can deprecate the
> > drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq
> > pwrseq_arche: The usecase which I am dealing with today, which is more
> >                           complex in nature.
> >
> > Then the respective drivers can add their drivers (if needed) based on
> > complexity.
> >
> > comments ??
> The key point here is DT maintainer (Rob) doesn't agree with adding new node
> for power sequence at dts.

Hmmm.
We haven't heard from Rob lately especially after introduction of complex
usecases. I hope he would revisit on above proposal.

Thanks,
Vaibhav