RE: [V5, 2/6] fsl/fman: Add FMan support

[Liberman Igal]

Regards,
Igal Liberman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 5:25 PM
> To: Liberman Igal-B31950 <Igal.Liberman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bucur Madalin-Cristian-B32716
> <madalin.bucur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [V5, 2/6] fsl/fman: Add FMan support
> 
> On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 10:22 -0500, Liberman Igal-B31950 wrote:
> > Regards,
> > Igal Liberman
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 11:31 PM
> > > To: Liberman Igal-B31950 <Igal.Liberman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bucur Madalin-Cristian-B32716
> > > <madalin.bucur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: [V5, 2/6] fsl/fman: Add FMan support
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 11:32 -0500, Liberman Igal-B31950 wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +struct device *fman_get_device(struct fman *fman) {  return
> > > > > > +fman->dev; }
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this really necessary?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Fman port needs fman->dev, fman structure is opaque, so yes, it's
> > > > needed.
> > >
> > > Why is opacity being maintained from one part of the fman driver to
> > > another?
> > > Isn't this the sort of excessive layering that was complained about?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > It's not really layering.
> > Fman Port uses Fman resources, it's not completely standalone.
> 
> That's my point -- if it's not standalone, why is "struct fman" opaque to the
> port code?
> 

OK, I'll expose struct fman. 

> -Scott