[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALszF6DOtAKLwo=VVYVKRZuhWC_NNvwKrV9R6_GYPdrRqh_0Wg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 22:05:24 +0100
From: Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>
To: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Antti Palosaari <crope@....fi>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Nikolay Borisov <Nikolay.Borisov@....com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/18] drivers: reset: Add STM32 reset driver
2015-03-11 14:08 GMT+01:00 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>:
> Am Dienstag, den 10.03.2015, 22:20 +0100 schrieb Maxime Coquelin:
>> 2015-03-10 21:21 GMT+01:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
>> > On Tuesday 10 March 2015 16:44:24 Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>> >> 2015-03-10 16:02 GMT+01:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
>> >> > On Friday 20 February 2015 19:01:06 Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>> >> >> +/* AHB1 */
>> >> >> +#define GPIOA_RESET 0
>> >> >> +#define GPIOB_RESET 1
>> >> >> +#define GPIOC_RESET 2
>> >> >> +#define GPIOD_RESET 3
>> >> >> +#define GPIOE_RESET 4
>> >> >> +#define GPIOF_RESET 5
>> >> >> +#define GPIOG_RESET 6
>> >> >> +#define GPIOH_RESET 7
>> >> >> +#define GPIOI_RESET 8
>> >> >> +#define GPIOJ_RESET 9
>> >> >> +#define GPIOK_RESET 10
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > As these are just the hardware numbers, it's better to not make them
>> >> > part of the binding at all. Instead, just document in the binding that
>> >> > one is supposed to pass the hardware number as the argument.
>> >>
>> >> The reset controller is part of the RCC (Reset & Clock Controller) IP.
>> >> In this version, I only provided the reset registers to the reset
>> >> controller driver, but as per Andreas Färber remark, I should avec a
>> >> single DT node for both the resets and clocks.
>> >>
>> >> In the next version I am preparing, the defines doesn't look as
>> >> trivial as in this version, GPIOA_RESET being 128 for instance.
>> >>
>> >> Is it fine for you if I keep the defines part of the binding?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > It's always better to avoid these files entirely, as they are
>> > a frequent source of merge dependencies, and they make it less
>> > obvious what's going on than having binary values in the dtb
>> > that make sense.
>>
>> I agree it is always painful to have to have to manage these merge dependencies.
>> What I will do, if Philipp agrees, is to list all the values in the
>> binding documentation.
>>
>> Doing that, the user of a reset won't have to do the calculation, and
>> no more merge dependencies.
>
> I'd prefer to have #defines for the reset bits if they are named in the
> documentation and use the names in the dts. But if you want to reference
> reset bits by number in the device tree instead, I won't insist.
>
> Consider using two cells in the phandle for register and bit offset
> instead of a single number that arbitrarily starts at 128.
Thanks for your feedback.
I would prefer using a single cell, which is less error prone in my opinion.
Will you accept this?
Kind regards,
Maxime
>
> regards
> Philipp
>
--
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