Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Jul 2022 18:00:53 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] regmap: support regmap_field_write() on non-readable fields | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> |
| |
On 19/07/2022 16:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19/07/2022 15:41, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 03:13:11PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 19/07/2022 14:54, Charles Keepax wrote: >> >>>> I think this will break other valid use-cases, regmap_readable (I >>>> believe) returns if the register is physically readable, however >>>> it should still be possible to use update bits if the register is >>>> in the cache even if it can't physically be read. So really you >>>> need to fall into this path if it is readable or in the cache. >> >>> But what type of real use case this would be trying to solve? Either >>> register is readable or not. The presence of cache is just optimization >>> and does not change the fact that we cannot read from register thus no >>> need to go via updates. >> >> The original reason for creating the cache code was to simulate >> readability on devices that have no read support at all (think 7x9 >> format I2C devices) so we can have things like helpers to map bitfields >> directly to subsystems (like ASoC uses extensively). The fact that it >> also improves performance when the hardware does support reads is nice >> too of course. >> >>>> Which does I guess also raise the question if your problem would >>>> be better solved with caching the register? >> >>> And how the value would appear in the cache? Since register cannot be >>> read, I expect the cache to be filled on first update. First update >>> would be read+write, so we are stuck again. >> >> This is one reason we allow cache defaults to be specified (it was the >> original reason, we later started using them to optimise out I/O during >> resyncs). > > Thanks Mark and Charles. Let me try the cache.
cache + forced write works for me, so I guess this patch is not really necessary.
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |