[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120405200829.GA29747@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 13:08:29 -0700
From: David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc: devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Point-to-point bus in device tree
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:23:46PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 04/05/2012 12:15 PM, David Brown wrote:
> > Some MSM SoCs have a small serial-type "bus" that is used to
> > communicate with the PMIC devices. This interface is always
> > point-to-point. I'm doing a device-tree conversion of the driver that
> > Ken Heitke posted last year <https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/17/503>.
> >
> > A naive conversion to device tree, would result in something like
> > this:
> >
> > qcom,ssbi@...000 {
> > compatible = "qcom,ssbi";
> > reg = <0x500000 0x1000>;
> > qcom,controller-type = "ssbi";
> >
> > qcom,pmic8058@0 {
> > reg = <0x0 0x01>;
> > ...
> > }
> > }
> >
> > There would end up being an extraneous register for the device on the
> > other end (there are no addresses), and there would need to be code in
> > the ssbi driver to traverse this small tree to find these nodes.
>
> Isn't that extra code simply:
>
> of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);
>
> That seems like pretty low overhead.
True, but it still bothers me to have to have a bogus register.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists