lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v11 2/6] mailbox: qcom: Create APCS child device for clock controller
Hi Bjorn,

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Bjorn Andersson
<bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Fri 22 Dec 20:57 PST 2017, Jassi Brar wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@linaro.org> wrote:
>> > There is a clock controller functionality provided by the APCS hardware
>> > block of msm8916 devices. The device-tree would represent an APCS node
>> > with both mailbox and clock provider properties.
>> >
>> The spec might depict a 'clock' box and 'mailbox' box inside the
>> bigger APCS box. However, from the code I see in this patchset, they
>> are orthogonal and can & should be represented as independent DT
>> nodes.
>
> The APCS consists of a number of different hardware blocks, one of them
> being the "APCS global" block, which is what this node and drivers
> relate to. On 8916 this contains both the IPC register and clock
> control. But it's still just one block according to the hardware
> specification.
>
> As such DT should describe the one hardware block by one node IMHO.
>
In my even humbler opinion, DT should describe a h/w functional unit
which _could_ be seen as a standalone component.
For example, if this APCS had a mac controller, would we also populate
a netdev from mailbox driver? And what if next revision moves/drops
this clock controller out of APCS, keeping mailbox controller exactly
same?

Maybe some DT maintainer could enlighten either of us.

Cheers!

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-29 07:15    [W:0.038 / U:27.120 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site