On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 11:16 -0500, Menon, Nishanth wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dirk Behme [mailto:dirk.be...@googlemail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:44 AM > > >>> --- a/drivers/i2c/twl4030_i2c.c > > >> All other drivers in drivers/i2c are host adapter drivers. Ie they > > >> implement i2c_read(), i2c_write(), i2c_probe(), and i2c_init(). The > > >> twl4030_i2c.c driver doesn't seem to fit this mold. Perhaps it would > > be > > >> better placed in drivers/misc or a new drivers/power directory similar > > >> to Linux? > > > > > > This function probably belongs to board/omap3/common/power.c -> or even > > better to the board file itself? > > > > I was about to mention the opposite ;) > > > > Jean-Christophe asked to move the code from power.c to driver directory > > > > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2009-May/052400.html > > > > If you follow above discussion, I was fine with power.c. If we get now > > a twl4030_i2c.c, we should merge the code from power.c into it, too > > (where ever it will be located and named, then). > > > This IMHO is the right approach -> but the real question is where in drivers/ > directory? How about drivers/i2c/chips and moving the current drivers/i2c/* > to drivers/i2c/busses - following the kernel organization?
I'd vote against creating a drivers/i2c/chips directory. I believe this directory is deprecated in the Linux kernel and they'd prefer drivers be put in the proper driver/<subsystem> directory. I'd vote to follow this convention in U-Boot too. I'm not familiar with the device or what features you plan on supporting so I can't speak to whether it'd fit better in drivers/power, drivers/misc, somewhere omap3/board specific, etc. Best. Peter _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
