[PATCH 2/6] ARM: add Highbank core platform support

From: robherring2@gmail.com (Rob Herring)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] ARM: add Highbank core platform support
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:03:24 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E568E6C.60904@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201108251802.29251.arnd@arndb.de>

On 08/25/2011 11:02 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 20 August 2011, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>> +#ifndef _MACH_HIGHBANK__SYSREGS_H_
>>>> +#define _MACH_HIGHBANK__SYSREGS_H_
>>>> +
>>>> +extern void __iomem *sregs_base;
>>>> +
>>>> +#define HB_SREG_A9_PWR_REQ          0xf00
>>>> +#define HB_SREG_A9_BOOT_STAT                0xf04
>>>> +#define HB_SREG_A9_BOOT_DATA                0xf08
>>>> +
>>>> +#define HB_PWR_SUSPEND                      0
>>>> +#define HB_PWR_SOFT_RESET           1
>>>> +#define HB_PWR_HARD_RESET           2
>>>> +#define HB_PWR_SHUTDOWN                     3
>>>> +
>>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> Do these really need to be global?
>>>
>>> I think it's better to put the base address and register definitions into a
>>> single file and export functions to be used from elsewhere.
>>
>> Yes, sregs are a random collection of functions, so it's going to be a
>> mixture of various users. Just HB_PWR_* alone are in 2 or 3 different
>> places.
> 
> Sorry, I'm not following.
> 
> Do you mean 'yes, they need to be global' or 'yes, it's better to export
> the functions'?
> 

I meant the former and functions as in h/w functionality, not C functions.

This will mainly be clock control plus a few other things. Is it really
desired to add another layer here when these are all just single
register writes?

Rob