[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALszF6AhwtYMfhpZjGJeHznteG0mG0_2qo1TcWw-z7anH3Lj4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 18:34:15 +0200
From: Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
Nikolay Borisov <Nikolay.Borisov@....com>,
Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
Antti Palosaari <crope@....fi>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kamil Lulko <rev13@...pl>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nicolae Rosia <nicolae.rosia@...il.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 14/16] ARM: dts: Introduce STM32F429 MCU
2015-05-13 21:37 GMT+02:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2015 20:29:12 Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> On 13/05/15 17:54, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>> > 2015-05-13 18:37 GMT+02:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
>> >>
>> >> We should definitely try to use the same compatible string for all of
>> >> them, and make a binding that is easy to use.
>> >>
>> >> I haven't fully understood the requirements for the various parts that
>> >> are involved here. My understanding so far was that the driver could
>> >> use the index from the first cell and compute
>> >>
>> >> void __iomem *reset_reg = rcc_base + 0x10 + 4 * index;
>> >> void __iomem *clock_reg = rcc_base + 0x30 + 4 * index;
>> >
>> > This calculation is true, but we have to take into account there is a
>> > hole in the middle, between AHB3, and APB1 register:
>>
>> ... and equally importantly, only allows us to use hardware mappings for
>> the gated clocks.
>>
>> > AHB1RSTR : offset = 0x10, index = 0
>> > AHB2RSTR : offset = 0x14, index = 1
>> > AHB3RSTR : offset = 0x18, index = 2
>> > <HOLE > : offset = 0x1c, index = 3
>> > APB1RSTR : offset = 0x20, index = 4
>> > APB2RSTR : offset = 0x24, index = 5
>> >
>> > So we have to carefully document this hole in the bindings, maybe by
>> > listing indexes in the documentation?
>>
>> The register set has PLL, mux and dividers in the registers at 0x00,
>> 0x04 and 0x08.
>>
>> Many of these clocks can be kept out of DT entirely because they are
>> only there to feed other parts of the clock tree. However some of the
>> dividers flow directly into cells that appear in device tree (such as
>> the systick) and so we need to be able to reference them.
>>
>> In other words the proposed mapping cannot allow us to express the
>> dividers properly (because the index would have to be negative):
>> void __iomem *clock_reg = rcc_base + 0x30 + 4 * index;
>>
>> Thus I'd favour using different indexes for reset and clock bindings,
>> both using the naive mapping function:
>> void __iomem *reg = rcc_base + 4 * index
>>
>> I think that its so much easier to check against the datasheet like
>> that. Admittedly is we follow the block-of-4-bytes idiom we have to
>> divide a hex number by four but thats not so hard and we end up with:
>>
>> resets = <&rcc 8 0>;
>> clocks = <&rcc 16 0>;
>>
>> At the end of the day if we say we want to follow the datasheet, lets be
>> do it in the most direct way properly.
Daniel, I'm fine with your proposal.
Doing that, we can have a single compatible string for stm32 family,
even if the reset start offset change between two chips.
>>
>>
>> PS
>> I've written a custom lookup function to to get from the DT index to an
>> offset into the struct clk *array I'm using. That means I don't care
>> much about any big holes in the register space.
>
> How about using the first cell to indicate the type (pll, mux, div, gate)
> and the second cell for the number (between 0 and 256)? That way, the
> gates numbers would match the reset numbers, and your internal mapping
> function would look a bit nicer.
That's another option.
In this case, for reset, we will only need one cell, right?
Regards,
Maxime
>
> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists