[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5243F5CD.6090709@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:52:29 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] clocksource: provide timekeeping for efm32 SoCs
On 09/26/2013 10:20 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 01:49:52AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 09/25/2013 05:32 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>>>>> +static void __init efm32_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + static int has_clocksource, has_clockevent;
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!has_clocksource) {
>>>>> + ret = efm32_clocksource_init(np);
>>>>> + if (!ret) {
>>>>> + has_clocksource = 1;
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!has_clockevent) {
>>>>> + ret = efm32_clockevent_init(np);
>>>>> + if (!ret) {
>>>>> + has_clockevent = 1;
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> I don't get the purpose of this initialization, can you explain ?
>>> An efm32 SoC has four timer blocks. A single block can only be used for
>>> one of clocksource or clockevent device and having more than one
>>> clocksource or clockevent device doesn't make sense. So this routine
>>> asserts that the first timer is used as clocksource and the second as
>>> clockevent device. The others are unused.
>>
>> Shouldn't be up to the dt to give the timers you want ?
> The dt looks as follows:
>
> timer0: timer@...10000 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010000 0x400>;
> interrupts = <2>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER0>;
> };
>
> timer1: timer@...10400 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010400 0x400>;
> interrupts = <12>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER1>;
> };
>
> timer2: timer@...10800 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010800 0x400>;
> interrupts = <13>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER2>;
> };
>
> timer3: timer@...10c00 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010c00 0x400>;
> interrupts = <14>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER3>;
> };
>
> What is your suggestion now?
> Add a property that specifies if the block
> should be used as clocksource or clockevent_device? That isn't a
> hardware description and so shouldn't go into the device tree.
At this point, I just asked a question and did not make any suggestion.
> Provide two drivers that match on "efm32,timer", one for clocksource and
> another for clockevent_device? That wouldn't work, too, as the first
> driver to be loaded would grab all four timers and the second would get
> none.
Thanks, now I understand the purpose of this routine, it is very similar
than:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg273984.html
right ?
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
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