linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv1] rtc: bcm-iproc: Add support for Broadcom iproc rtc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <54DD2685.6020207@broadcom.com>
Date:	Thu, 12 Feb 2015 14:17:41 -0800
From:	Arun Ramamurthy <arun.ramamurthy@...adcom.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
	<a.zummo@...ertech.it>, <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
	<pawel.moll@....com>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	<ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Arun Ramamurthy <arunrama@...adcom.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	<galak@...eaurora.org>, <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv1] rtc: bcm-iproc: Add support for Broadcom iproc rtc

Hi Arnd

My apologies for the late reply, I was moved to other work items. I 
wanted to get more clarification on the syscon issue so that I can 
submit the next patch set. If I understand correctly, you would like
me to move the CRMU logic to a new driver under mfd/ and use the syscon
api calls in my rtc driver? Thanks

Arun

On 14-12-17 06:31 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 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.
>
> 	Arnd
>
--
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/