Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934662AbaKMX7e (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 18:59:34 -0500 Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:55475 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934386AbaKMX7c (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 18:59:32 -0500 X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Originating-IP: 104.193.169.186 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1/z42JF5J+wEeYEXb0ST04K Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 15:58:41 -0800 From: Tony Lindgren To: Paul Walmsley Cc: Tomi Valkeinen , Marek Belisko , robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, bcousson@baylibre.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, plagnioj@jcrosoft.com, grant.likely@linaro.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, hns@goldelico.com, Tero Kristo Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] arm: dts: omap3-gta04: Add static configuration for devconf1 register Message-ID: <20141113235840.GS26481@atomide.com> References: <1415051968-4878-1-git-send-email-marek@goldelico.com> <1415051968-4878-5-git-send-email-marek@goldelico.com> <5463585D.9070209@ti.com> <20141112150210.GC26481@atomide.com> <5464969F.30708@ti.com> <20141113182848.GQ26481@atomide.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Paul Walmsley [141113 15:01]: > Hi > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Tomi Valkeinen [141113 03:33]: > > > On 12/11/14 17:02, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > > >> And, with a quick grep, I see CONTROL_DEVCONF1 touched in multiple > > > >> places in the kernel. I wonder if adding a pinmux entry for it could > > > >> cause some rather odd problems. > > > > > > > > They can all use pinctrl-single no problem. > > > > > > Can, but don't. That's my worry. If we touch the DEVCONF1 via pinmux, > > > and we have code in mach-omap2 that also touch DEVCONF1, without any > > > knowledge (and locking) between those... > > > > Hmm yeah the McBSP clock mux could be racy as the mux register for > > McBSP is treated as a clock. This register muxes the clock between > > external pin and internal clock. Considering that this should be > > selectable at board level as the external clock probably needs to be > > used if level shifters are being used, it should be really handled by > > pinctrl-single. > > > > The other use for hsmmc.c and pdata-quirks.c for the one time mux for > > MMC clock from the MMC clock pin. That can be done with pinctrl-single > > from the MMC driver too for DT based booting. > > > > Then we just have the save and restore of the registers for > > off-idle. > > > > > So _maybe_ that's not an issue, as the pinmux config we have here is > > > fixed, and done once at boot time, and maybe the code in mach-omap2 that > > > touch DEVCONF1 is also ran just once and not at the same time as the > > > pinmux. But I don't know if that's so. > > > > It seems we could just do a read-only check for McBSP in the clock > > code for the mux register, or even completely drop that code from > > cclock3xxx_data.c and start using the pinctrl for that mux. > > > > Paul & Tero, got any comments here? > > It's best to move all of the SCM register reads/writes to an SCM IP block > driver. This driver would be the only entity that would touch the SCM IP > block registers - no other code on the system would touch it (perhaps > aside from anything needed for early init). The SCM driver would enforce > mutual exclusion via a spinlock, so concurrent SCM register modifications > wouldn't flake out. Then the SCM driver would register clocks with the > CCF, register pins with the pinctrl subsystem, etc. etc. We actually do have that with pinctrl-single + syscon. We certainly need to implement more Linux framework drivers for the SCM registers. Things like regulators, clocks, and PHYs, but they should use pinctrl-single + syscon. See the the pbias-regulator.c for example. Looking at the McBSP clock handling, threre's yet more handling of the same DEVCONF1 mux register in omap2_mcbsp_set_clks_src that gets alled from omap_mcbsp_dai_set_dai_sysclk. To me it seems that if we handle the DEVCONF with pinctrl-single, we don't need most of the McBSP fck code or the omap2_mcbsp_set_clks_src. Having the mux register as the clock enable register is not nice.. Who knows what the clock coming from the external pin might be :) Regards, Tony -- 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/