From: ohad@wizery.com (Ohad Ben-Cohen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 06/10] hwspinlock: OMAP4: Add spinlock support in DT
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:56:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK=WgbYgatyLWqmrZnUfSGxCkZsRiJ3sbQwmenxyiJ6JBw5vJA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E686B71.2060107@ti.com>
Hi Benoit,
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Cousson, Benoit <b-cousson@ti.com> wrote:
> Hehe, I'm not the one who wrote that driver :-)
>
> This is not wrong for the current HW. The point is do we want to anticipate
> potential HW evolution that might never happen on that IP?
I originally really thought we can ignore those cases (hence the 0
base id ;), and personally I still think the scenario is a bit
fictional, and wouldn't even mind just having omap_hwspinlock_probe()
return an error if it is unexpectedly probed with a second device.
But if fixing this entirely only means doing a small change, then it's
surely nicer.
> This is no different than the multiple GPIO controllers we have today.
> Since we cannot rely on the DT nodes order, I added an explicit "id"
> attribute to provide that information to the driver. And then the baseid is
> "id * #gpios".
That would work if #hwspinlock is a fixed number, but a "baseid"
attribute would allow supporting devices with different #hwspinlocks
per device. Since I am not aware of any real hardware that does this
kind of blasphemy, I can't say if the latter is really necessary :) If
you prefer the former, I'm entirely fine with it.
Thanks,
Ohad.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-08 7:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-24 13:09 [RFC PATCH 00/10] OMAP: Add DT support for early init OMAP4 devices Benoit Cousson
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] OMAP2+: l3-noc: Add support for device-tree Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:01 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-08 21:59 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-09-08 23:35 ` Grant Likely
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] arm/dts: OMAP4: Add a main ocp entry bound to l3-noc driver Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:03 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-09 0:10 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-09-09 2:41 ` Grant Likely
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] documentation/dt: Add l3-noc bindings Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:06 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-09 0:18 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] arm/dts: OMAP4: Add mpu, dsp and iva nodes Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:07 ` Grant Likely
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] documentation/dt: Add mpu, dsp and iva bindings Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:09 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-09 0:30 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-09-09 2:40 ` Grant Likely
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] hwspinlock: OMAP4: Add spinlock support in DT Benoit Cousson
2011-09-07 19:58 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2011-09-08 7:14 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-09-08 7:56 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen [this message]
2011-09-08 8:07 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-09-08 8:11 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2011-09-08 14:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-09-08 15:34 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-09-08 16:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-09-08 16:36 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2011-09-09 12:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-09-11 7:57 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2011-09-12 14:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] documentation/dt: Add spinlock bindings Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:10 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-09 0:32 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] gpio/omap: Adapt GPIO driver to DT Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:15 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-09 1:48 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] arm/dts: OMAP4: Add gpio nodes Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:16 ` Grant Likely
2011-08-24 13:09 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] documentation/dt: Add OMAP GPIO properties Benoit Cousson
2011-09-08 18:18 ` Grant Likely
2011-09-09 1:51 ` Cousson, Benoit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAK=WgbYgatyLWqmrZnUfSGxCkZsRiJ3sbQwmenxyiJ6JBw5vJA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ohad@wizery.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).