Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757163Ab3GQVHT (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:07:19 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:3559 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755988Ab3GQVHR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:07:17 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,687,1367996400"; d="scan'208";a="366900557" Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 23:07:00 +0200 From: Samuel Ortiz To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Olof Johansson , Pawel Moll , Nicolas Pitre , Amit Kucheria , Jon Medhurst , Achin Gupta , Sudeep KarkadaNagesha Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/1] drivers: mfd: Versatile Express SPC support Message-ID: <20130717210700.GA19864@zurbaran> References: <1373990743-23106-1-git-send-email-lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1373990743-23106-1-git-send-email-lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2150 Lines: 51 Hi Lorenzo, On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 05:05:42PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > Hello, > > version v5 of VExpress SPC driver, please read on the changelog for major > changes and explanations. > > The probing scheme is unchanged, since after trying the early platform > devices approach it appeared that the end result was no better than the > current one. The only clean solution relies either on changing how > secondaries are brought up in the kernel (later than now) or enable > early platform device registration through DT. Please check this > thread for the related discussion: > > https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss/2013-June/036542.html > > The interface was adapted to regmap and again reverted to old driver for > the following reasons: > > - Power down registers locking is hairy and requires arch spinlocks in > the MCPM back end to work properly, normal spinlocks cannot be used > - Regmap adds unnecessary code to manage SPC since it is just a bunch of > registers used to control power management flags, the overhead is just > not worth it (talking about power down registers, not the vexpress config > interface) > - The locking scheme behind regmap requires all registers in the map > to be protected with the same lock, which is not exactly what we want > here > - Given the reasons above, adding a regmap interface buys us nothing from > a driver readability and maintainability perspective (again just talking > about the power interface, a few registers) because for the SPC it would > simply not be used > > /drivers/mfd is probably not the right place for this code as it stands (but > probably will be when the entire driver, with DVFS and config interface, is > complete). Could you please elaborate on how will the SPC driver extend into an MFD driver? Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/