Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Fabien Dessenne <fabien.dessenne@st.com>
To:     Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        <linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
CC:     Fabien Dessenne <fabien.dessenne@st.com>,
        Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@st.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/6] hwspinlock: allow sharing of hwspinlocks
Date:   Wed, 13 Mar 2019 16:50:31 +0100
Message-ID: <1552492237-28810-1-git-send-email-fabien.dessenne@st.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

The current implementation does not allow two different devices to use
a common hwspinlock. This patch set proposes to have, as an option, some
hwspinlocks shared between several users.

Below is an example that explain the need for this:
	exti: interrupt-controller@5000d000 {
		compatible = "st,stm32mp1-exti", "syscon";
		interrupt-controller;
		#interrupt-cells = <2>;
		reg = <0x5000d000 0x400>;
		hwlocks = <&hsem 1>;
	};
The two drivers (stm32mp1-exti and syscon) refer to the same hwlock.
With the current hwspinlock implementation, only the first driver succeeds
in requesting (hwspin_lock_request_specific) the hwlock. The second request
fails.


The proposed approach does not modify the API, but extends the DT 'hwlocks'
property with a second optional parameter (the first one identifies an
hwlock) that specifies whether an hwlock is requested for exclusive usage
(current behavior) or can be shared between several users.
Examples:
	hwlocks = <&hsem 8>;	Ref to hwlock #8 for exclusive usage
	hwlocks = <&hsem 8 0>;	Ref to hwlock #8 for exclusive (0) usage
	hwlocks = <&hsem 8 1>;	Ref to hwlock #8 for shared (1) usage

As a constraint, the #hwlock-cells value must be 1 or 2.
In the current implementation, this can have theorically any value but:
- all of the exisiting drivers use the same value : 1.
- the framework supports only one value : 1 (see implementation of
  of_hwspin_lock_simple_xlate())
Hence, it shall not be a problem to restrict this value to 1 or 2 since
it won't break any driver.

Fabien Dessenne (6):
  dt-bindings: hwlock: add support of shared locks
  hwspinlock: allow sharing of hwspinlocks
  dt-bindings: hwlock: update STM32 #hwlock-cells value
  ARM: dts: stm32: Add hwspinlock node for stm32mp157 SoC
  ARM: dts: stm32: Add hwlock for irqchip on stm32mp157
  ARM: dts: stm32: hwlocks for GPIO for stm32mp157

 .../devicetree/bindings/hwlock/hwlock.txt          | 27 +++++--
 .../bindings/hwlock/st,stm32-hwspinlock.txt        |  6 +-
 Documentation/hwspinlock.txt                       | 10 ++-
 arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157-pinctrl.dtsi          |  2 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi                 | 10 +++
 drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_core.c               | 82 +++++++++++++++++-----
 drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_internal.h           |  2 +
 7 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

-- 
2.7.4