LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <email@example.com>
To: Arun Ramamurthy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Ray Jui <email@example.com>,
firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,
Arun Ramamurthy <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [PATCHv1] rtc: bcm-iproc: Add support for Broadcom iproc rtc
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:31:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1603624.EMYvBCWhuM@wuerfel> (raw)
On Tuesday 16 December 2014 13:54:04 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:
> On 14-12-16 12:27 PM, Ray Jui wrote:
> > On 12/16/2014 12:19 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> It sounds like CRMU is some other unit aside from the RTC. Could this
> >> be something like a generic system controller? I think it should
> >> either have its own driver or use the syscon logic if that is what
> >> this is.
> > Giving that CRMU has scattered, miscellaneous control logic for multiple
> > different peripherals, it probably makes more sense to use the syscon
> > logic here.
> Arnd, thanks for the feedback. If I was to write a separate driver for
> the CRMU, I would have to export certain functions and create an api
> that only this RTC driver would use. I am not sure that is efficient or
> required. What is your opinion?
> Would it be better if I use the syson api in my current driver and move
> the CRMU registers to separate syscon device tree entry?
This is something that's normally up to the platform maintainers, depending
on what works best for a given SoC. If you have a control block that
wants to export the same high-level API for multiple drivers, that's
fine, but if literally every register does something different, a syscon
driver works best.
It's also possible that some of the functions of the CRMU already have
abstractions, like system-reset, device-reset, regulator or clock support.
In that case, you can still use syscon but have the more other drivers
use that for accessing the registers.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-17 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-16 19:22 arun.ramamurthy
2014-12-16 19:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-12-16 20:05 ` Arun Ramamurthy
2014-12-16 20:19 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-12-16 20:27 ` Ray Jui
2014-12-16 21:54 ` Arun Ramamurthy
2014-12-17 14:31 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2015-02-12 22:17 ` Arun Ramamurthy
2015-03-04 22:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-03-04 22:40 ` Arun Ramamurthy
2015-03-04 22:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-03-04 22:53 ` Arun Ramamurthy
2015-03-04 22:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-03-11 20:00 ` Arun Ramamurthy
2015-03-11 20:31 ` Arnd Bergmann
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--subject='Re: [PATCHv1] rtc: bcm-iproc: Add support for Broadcom iproc rtc' \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).