Kumar, >>>>> >>>>>> 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-a...@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. >> >> I didn't get you completely. Do you intend to compute the base_id using >> cell-index and number of locks (which may be a separate field altogether >> if this information cannot be read from the h/w)? My understanding is >> that cell-index is primarily used for identifying the h/w instance number. > > I was suggesting using cell-index instead of base_id. What we should > probably due is have a devicetree/bindings/hwlock/hwlock.txt that would > describe generic properties like this and just reference that in the omap > binding spec.
Common hwlock.txt sounds good. Will make the change. > > I'm thinking if we dont use cell-index, that it should probably be > hwlock-base-id > I prefer to use hwlock-base-id. I think we should also be defining a common property name for number of locks, say hwlock-num-locks. regards Suman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
