Hi Heiko,
在 2016/2/2 5:17, Heiko Stübner 写道:
Hi David,
Am Montag, 1. Februar 2016, 16:54:38 schrieb David.Wu:
在 2016/1/30 20:39, Heiko Stuebner 写道:
Am Samstag, 30. Januar 2016, 20:01:45 schrieb David Wu:
As rk3368 contained two separated iodomain areas, this was
determined to use which regmap base address.
Signed-off-by: David Wu <[email protected]>
I don't think we need to specify this on a driver level. Both GRF areas
are
"General register files" only located in two separate power-domains.
So the rockchip,grf property should work for both. Especially as nothing
keeps designers from introducing yet another GRF-area somewhere else ;-)
>From when I started working on the rk3368, I still have a preliminary
patches for that sitting here, so I've attached on how I envisoned that to
work.
Okay, i agree to you, but it make someone a little confused just from
the drive code,
not DT file, about pmugrf regmap base address.:-)
How do you feel about intergating GRF and PMU drivers in one driver?
Thanks!
I will very strongly disagree here ;-) .
Similar to the power-domains being part of the pmu, the io-domains are
part of their individual GRFs. So if you want it really clean and tidy the way
to go foward will be the attached patches. Compile-tested only.
Thanks for your reply, the patchs look better than mine.
I have tested them on sdk board and i found something may be wrong.
"parent->of_node" instead of "parent", as the parent is not null if
parent-node not used.
if (parent->of_node) {
iod->grf = syscon_node_to_regmap(parent->of_node);
} else {
dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "falling back to old binding\n");
iod->grf = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(np, "rockchip,grf");
}
Other things like the usbphy control should move there as well in the long
run. But that's not immediate necessary.
Heiko
