Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 13:01:27 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@kryo.se>,
        Tim Bird <tbird20d@gmail.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@arm.com>,
        Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>,
        "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@codeaurora.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] DT: hwspinlock: Add binding documentation for
 Qualcomm hwmutex
Message-ID: <20150416120127.GM2866@leverpostej>
References: <CA+bK7J6donXZvLqN2Fv_9dVYgj9j=xJAwmEEo86+XKZ4oj166A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=WgbaAtBBNpf61rvO22TXq+6M6wk5jX1Cgxjqce8dXCJyigw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+bK7J6rXtF54Tp1+mkDbv8Hok88MVZeC+mLvjjGjzZ4KtTHEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=WgbZxZ0SUjZzBeqELZ=WQH5B5c41UCYc8_uHqOpgBtLVOfQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+bK7J7OB2bbGna7y-O4egF-rhig-bdf1W5Uw+GG7F0VjDepUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=WgbYwk=DEgNFKn11BHpS=V_m=6Okf=i7w5NkLHwu8ryMaJg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJAp7OgZo8rUGL1xkrSVTXMZfgzbV8eGEMniSquw7owkRAqKmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=WgbauoPf52v3P7NLPsXaRUmGWo_K6ZcV4w3UO6xs7MUrJsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=WgbY-5OsfdKJxGScvGj5sv-M-UvxhCfgSTunHiufvq1PXEQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_Jsq+GhhhoHgRDOkK4=oWtSVmvw=UpLoU-Ey5M7tdNi5OZ2Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAL_Jsq+GhhhoHgRDOkK4=oWtSVmvw=UpLoU-Ey5M7tdNi5OZ2Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 860
Lines: 21

> The part I'm not clear what the purpose of "pool-hwlock" was.

One use-case was a set of hwlocks having no fixed purpose, and being
available for dynamic allocation between the OS and other entities (e.g.
some RTOS on another core).

The set of locks forming a reusable pool, and any information associated
with them (e.g. the logical IDs used by the other entity) are a property
of that interface rather than the hwlock provider.

So you'd describe those pools of locks in some interface-specific
manner, consuming hwlocks from a set of hwlock providers.

Hopefully that doesn't maek things less clear...

Mark.
--
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/