Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] bus: mhi: Move sahara protocol driver under drivers/bus/mhi
Manivannan Sadhasivam <[email protected]> Mon, 13 Apr 2026 16:34:53 +0530
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.mhi,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-arm-msm,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <sab2tgxtiftme5gscknsl7cfifpshtlrnnihbm2g56ppbowcit@bg4bzwuta6a6> |
On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 02:20:02PM -0600, Jeff Hugo wrote: > On 3/19/2026 12:31 AM, Kishore Batta wrote: > > The Sahara protocol driver is currently located under the QAIC > > accelerator subsystem even though protocol itself is transported over the > > MHI bus and is used by multiple Qualcomm flashless devices. > > > > Relocate the Sahara protocol driver to drivers/bus/mhi and register it as > > an independent MHI protocol driver. This avoids treating Sahara as QAIC > > specific and makes it available for reuse by other MHI based devices. > > > > As part of this move, introduce a dedicated Kconfig and Makefile under the > > MHI subsystem and expose the sahara interface via a common header. > > I don't think this belongs under MHI. Mani needs to confirm that he agrees > with the concept of moving this there. > > The Sahara protocol as defined by the spec does not require MHI. We know > that there are Sahara implementations over USB. I don't see a dependency or > relationship to MHI other than the current in-kernel implementation uses > MHI, but there are plenty of things that use MHI (qaic, mhi-net, ath12k, > etc) which are not a part of the MHI bus. > Since Sahara is a MHI client driver, it is OK with me to place it under drivers/bus/mhi/host/. We do tend to host the client/controller drivers if they also bind to separate top level subsystems like Net, WWAN... but for the pure protocol drivers like Sahara, MHI can provide asylum. - Mani -- மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்