[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <14b62a74-4b4f-42b9-6043-ab8445a3f627@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 10:12:32 +0100
From: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
To: Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] nvmem: qfprom: Don't touch certain fuses
On 01/10/2020 22:49, Evan Green wrote:
> Oh no, I realized this isn't nearly as beautiful when I try to move it
> into the core. The low level read/write interface between the nvmem
> core and the driver is a range. So to move this into the core I'd have
> to implement all the overlap computation logic to potentially break up
> a read into several small reads in cases where there are many little
> keepout ranges. It was much simpler when I could just check each byte
> offset individually, and because I was doing it in this one
> rarely-used driver I could make that performance tradeoff without much
> penalty.
>
> I could do all range/overlap handling if you want, but it'll be a
> bigger change, and I worry my driver would be the only one to end up
> using it. What do you think?
I still think this should go in to core. core should be able to avoid
checking by the presence of any restricted range, so it should not be a
overhead for other non-users. regmap has similar feature we can take
some inspiration from that code!!
--srini
> -Evan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists