[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200908150321.GA2352@mani-NUC7i5DNKE>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 20:33:30 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To: Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Use regmap for accessing hardware
registers
On 0908, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 5:18 PM Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 4:48 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 08-09-20, 16:41, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > > On 0908, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > > On 08-09-20, 13:27, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > > > > Use regmap for accessing cpufreq registers in hardware.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why ? Please mention why a change is required in the log.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Only because it is recommended to use regmap for abstracting the hw access.
> > >
> > > Yes it can be very useful in abstracting the hw access in case of
> > > busses like SPI/I2C, others, but in this case there is only one way of
> > > doing it with the exact same registers. I am not sure it is worth it
> > > here. FWIW, I have never played with regmaps personally, and so every
> > > chance I can be wrong here.
> >
> > One could handle the reg offsets through a struct initialisation, but
> > then you end up with lots of #defines for bitmasks and bits for each
> > version of the IP. And the core code becomes a bit convoluted IMO,
> > trying to handle the differences.
> >
> > regmap hides the differences of the bit positions and register offsets
> > between several IP versions.
> >
> > > > Moreover it handles the proper locking for us in the core (spinlock vs mutex).
> > >
> > > What locking do you need here ?
> >
> > Right, locking isn't the main reason here.
>
> Having said this, perhaps this patch can be held back for now, since
> we're not yet using some of the features of regmap to abstract away
> bit fields and such.
>
Okay. Dropping this patch for now (in v2)!
Thanks,
Mani
> We don't strictly need it for just different register offsets.
>
> Regards,
> Amit
Powered by blists - more mailing lists