[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8588a941-6d3e-9e14-cb21-d7af29b4b2bd@linaro.org>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2022 13:38:40 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, lee.jones@...aro.org
Cc: robh+dt@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de,
matthias.bgg@...il.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nfraprado@...labora.com,
kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: mfd: syscon: Add support for regmap
fast-io
On 01/04/2022 15:50, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> The syscon driver now enables the .fast_io regmap configuration when
> the 'fast-io' property is found in a syscon node.
>
> Keeping in mind that, in regmap, fast_io is checked only if we are
> not using hardware spinlocks, allow the fast-io property only if
> there is no hwlocks reference (and vice-versa).
I have doubts you need a property for this. "fast" is subjective in
terms of hardware, so this looks more like a software property, not
hardware.
I think most of MMIOs inside a SoC are considered fast. Usually also the
syscon/regmap consumer knows which regmap it gets, so knows that it is
fast or not.
>
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml | 15 +++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml
> index 13baa452cc9d..85a2e83b5861 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml
> @@ -83,11 +83,26 @@ properties:
> $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> enum: [1, 2, 4, 8]
>
> + fast-io:
> + description:
> + Indicates that this bus has a very fast IO, for which
> + acquiring a mutex would be significant overhead.
> + When present, regmap will use a spinlock instead.
Regmap is current implementation behind this, but it's not related to
hardware, so how about removing it from the description? Something like:
"..., for which different locking methods should be used to reduce
overhead (e.g. spinlock instead of mutex)."
> + type: boolean
> +
> hwlocks:
> maxItems: 1
> description:
> Reference to a phandle of a hardware spinlock provider node.
>
> +if:
> + required:
> + - hwlocks
> +then:
> + not:
> + required:
> + - fast-io
> +
> required:
> - compatible
> - reg
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists