linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] ARM: davinci: da830-evm: use aemif platform driver

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: <CAMpxmJXtH9ibXS55iP-aFGTgd19hSafZdb+hFhPyA8u9arOSfg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Jun 2018 18:23:32 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
To:     David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] ARM: davinci: da830-evm: use aemif platform driver

2018-06-25 18:20 GMT+02:00 David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>:
> On 06/25/2018 10:29 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>
>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>>
>> We now support board files in the aemif driver. Register a platform
>> device instead of using the handcrafted API in da830-evm.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da830-evm.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++------
>>   1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da830-evm.c
>> b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da830-evm.c
>> index b2470141dba3..666db3cee08a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da830-evm.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da830-evm.c
>> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/platform_data/mtd-davinci-aemif.h>
>>   #include <linux/platform_data/spi-davinci.h>
>>   #include <linux/platform_data/usb-davinci.h>
>> +#include <linux/platform_data/ti-aemif.h>
>>   #include <linux/regulator/machine.h>
>>     #include <asm/mach-types.h>
>> @@ -333,14 +334,48 @@ static struct resource da830_evm_nand_resources[] =
>> {
>>         },
>>   };
>>   -static struct platform_device da830_evm_nand_device = {
>> -       .name           = "davinci_nand",
>> -       .id             = 1,
>> -       .dev            = {
>> -               .platform_data  = &da830_evm_nand_pdata,
>> +static struct platform_device da830_evm_aemif_devices[] = {
>> +       {
>> +               .name           = "davinci_nand",
>> +               .id             = 1,
>
>
> Actually, now that I've thought about it some more. It probably
> makes more sense to make all of the "davinci_nand" devices in this
> series use id = -1 since there is only one per board. It looks like
> da850 is the only one that has a lookup for "davinic_nand.0" already.
>
> I think that we are going to have to add clock lookups for the
> "davinci_nand" devices as well. Although the driver doesn't do
> clk_get() explicitly, I think some function it calls does get a
> clock. I remember that we had to add a clock-ranges property to
> device tree to get the davinci_nand driver working, which is why
> I think we are going to need a clock lookup for these devices
> as well.
>

Seems like ever since commit a8e3923ab571 ("mtd: rawnand: davinci:
don't acquire and enable clock") we no longer need to worry about the
clock entries for nand.

Thanks,
Bart