lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Aug]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] hwspinlock/msm: Add support for Qualcomm MSM HW Mutex block
From
Date

On Aug 10, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:

> + Grant
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>> On Jul 29, 2013, at 4:40 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>> On 07/29, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/msm/tcsr-mutex.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/msm/tcsr-mutex.txt
>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>> index 0000000..ddd6889
>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/msm/tcsr-mutex.txt
>>>>
>>>> Maybe this should go under a new hwspinlock directory?
>>>
>>> Will look for Ohad to comment on this.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
>>>>>> +Qualcomm MSM Hardware Mutex Block:
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +The hardware block provides mutexes utilized between different processors
>>>>>> +on the SoC as part of the communication protocol used by these processors.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Required properties:
>>>>>> +- compatible: should be "qcom,tcsr-mutex"
>>>>>> +- reg: Should contain registers location and length of mutex registers
>>>>>> +- reg-names:
>>>>>> + "mutex-base" - string to identify mutex registers
>>>>>> +- qcom,num-locks: the number of locks/mutexes supported
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Example:
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + qcom,tcsr-mutex@fd484000 {
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it should be hw-mutex@fd484000?
>>>
>>> again, will look for Ohad to make some comment on this.
>>>
>>>>>> + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
>>>>>> + reg = <0xfd484000 0x1000>;
>>>>>> + reg-names = "mutex-base";
>>>>>> + qcom,num-locks = <32>;
>>>>>> + };
>>
>> Ohad, ping.
>
> I'd prefer a DT maintainer to take a look at your two open questions
> above, especially if I'm to merge a new file into the devicetree
> Documentation folder.
>
> Grant, any chance you have a moment to take a look?
>
> Otherwise, Stephen - do we have your Ack here? I was happy to see your
> review but not sure what's the latest status.
>
> Thanks,
> Ohad.
> --

So I think I'd ask you to recommend a name, should we just us 'hwspinlock'. The general view from ePAPR and dts is the node name should be a bit more generic (like ethernet or pci). So what would you suggest?

- k

--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-08-12 19:41    [W:0.059 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site