Re: [PATCH 1/2] hwspinlock/omap: add support for dt nodes

[Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>]

On Sep 3, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Suman Anna wrote:

> Kumar,
> 
> On 09/03/2013 01:50 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> 
>> On Sep 3, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Suman Anna wrote:
>> 
>>> HwSpinlock IP is present only on OMAP4 and other newer SoCs,
>>> which are all device-tree boot only. This patch adds the
>>> base support for parsing the DT nodes, and removes the code
>>> dealing with the traditional platform device instantiation.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>>> ---
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/hwlock/omap-hwspinlock.txt | 28 ++++++++++
>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile                       |  3 --
>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/hwspinlock.c                   | 60 ----------------------
>>> drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c               | 21 ++++++--
>>> 4 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/omap-hwspinlock.txt
>>> delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-omap2/hwspinlock.c
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/omap-hwspinlock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/omap-hwspinlock.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..adfb8ad
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/omap-hwspinlock.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
>>> +OMAP4+ HwSpinlock Driver
>>> +
>>> +Required properties:
>>> +- compatible:		Currently supports only "ti,omap4-hwspinlock" for
>>> +				OMAP44xx, OMAP54xx, AM33xx, AM43xx, DRA7xx SoCs
>>> +- reg:			Contains the hwspinlock register address range (base
>>> +			address and length)
>>> +- ti,hwmods:		Name of the hwmod associated with the hwspinlock device
>>> +
>>> +Optional properties:
>>> +- base_id:		Base Id for the locks for a particular hwspinlock
>>> +			device. If not mentioned, a default value of 0 is used.
>>> +			This property is mandatory ONLY if a SoC has several
>>> +			hwspinlock devices. There are currently no such OMAP
>>> +			SoCs.
>> 
>> Should this be ti,base_id ? [ I know its kinda generic in its intent for any SoC w/multiple blocks ]
> 
> I didn't add the "ti," prefix exactly for the same reason - it is
> generic w.r.t the hwspinlock core irrespective of the SoC family, and
> there is nothing ti or OMAP specific about it. I have added it to keep
> the DT node definition in sync with the driver code. If it is too
> generic a name, it can always be renamed as hwlock_base_id. This will be
> SoC agnostic property for the hwspinlock driver. What do you think?

I'm wondering if we should use cell-index for this purpose.

- k

> 
> regards
> Suman
> 
>> 
>>> +
>>> +			See documentation on struct hwspinlock_pdata in
>>> +			linux/hwspinlock.h for more details.
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +Example:
>>> +
>>> +/* OMAP4 */
>>> +hwspinlock: spinlock@4a0f6000 {
>>> +	compatible = "ti,omap4-hwspinlock";
>>> +	reg = <0x4a0f6000 0x1000>;
>>> +	ti,hwmods = "spinlock";
>>> +};
>> 
>> [ snip ]
>> 
>> - k
>> 
> 

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation