Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932339AbbGTIfe (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2015 04:35:34 -0400 Received: from eusmtp01.atmel.com ([212.144.249.243]:39304 "EHLO eusmtp01.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932295AbbGTIfc (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2015 04:35:32 -0400 Message-ID: <55ACB2C9.5070701@atmel.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 16:35:21 +0800 From: Josh Wu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maxime Ripard CC: Nicolas Ferre , Alexandre Belloni , , Guenter Roeck , Wei Yongjun , Ben Dooks , , "Krzysztof Kozlowski" , Sebastian Reichel , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , David Woodhouse , Fabian Frederick , Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: reset: at91: add sama5d3 reset function References: <1436436947-11210-1-git-send-email-josh.wu@atmel.com> <20150710060350.GA3127@piout.net> <559F7AC4.6050008@atmel.com> <20150710120907.GC3127@piout.net> <20150710123148.GA28632@lukather> <559FEED3.5080505@atmel.com> <55A32EC8.4080309@atmel.com> <20150720075231.GQ28632@lukather> In-Reply-To: <20150720075231.GQ28632@lukather> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.168.5.13] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2384 Lines: 59 Hi, Maxime On 7/20/2015 3:52 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 11:21:44AM +0800, Josh Wu wrote: >> On 7/11/2015 12:12 AM, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >>> Le 10/07/2015 14:31, Maxime Ripard a ?crit : >>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:09:07PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> On 10/07/2015 at 15:56:52 +0800, Josh Wu wrote : >>>>>> I would agree with Maxime. Currently all latest chip reset function is >>>>>> compatible with the atmel,sama5d3-rstc. >>>>>> So check compatible string is enough for now. >>>>>> But of cause if we have other incompatible reset in future with new chip, >>>>>> the structure like you said is needed. >>>>> We managed to avoid using of_machine_is_compatible() in all the at91 >>>>> drivers. I'd like to keep it that way. It was painful enough to remove >>>>> all those cpu_is_at91xxx calls. >>>> That's your call... >>>> >>>>> Also, using it is trying to match strings and will result in longer boot >>>>> times. >>>> Have you looked at the implementation of of_match_device? If that's >>>> really a concern to you, you should actually avoid it. >>> I agree: let's keep it simple and use of_match_device(). >> Ok. I will keep it as it is now: use the (match->data != sama5d3_restart) >> for the condition. > I'm not just that's been an option in our discussion so far. > > Nicolas said that he was agreeing with me, but at the same time said > the complete opposite of what I was arguing for, so I'm not really > sure what's really on his mind, but the two options that were > discussed were to remove that test, and either: > > - Use of_device_is_compatible to prevent the loop execution Thank you for explaining, it is clear to me. I'll take this above option. As the of_device_is_compatible() almost same as of_match_node()/of_match_device(). Except that of_device_is_compatible() is more efficient (in this case It calls __of_device_is_compatible() directly) than of_match_node/of_match_device. > > - define a structure with a flag to say whether you need the ram > controller quirk or not, and test that flag. > > Maxime > Best Regards, Josh Wu -- 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/