[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/6] regmap: add MMIO bus support
On 04/04/2012 04:59 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 03:48:31PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> From: Stephen Warren <>
>> This is a basic memory-mapped-IO bus for regmap. It has the following
>> features and limitations:
> I applied these up to here but it was painful as patch 2 didn't apply
> cleanly to -rc1 and git am couldn't find the blobs to use for
> resolution. Please check things worked out OK but I'm pretty sure they
> did.

The result of merging your topic/mmio and for-next branches is the same
as my local copy of patch 4 I sent, modulo that my local copy still has
regmap_open_file(), but that's not related.

So yes, I think the patches applied fine.

>> * Registers themselves may be 8, 16, 32, or 64-bit. 64-bit is only
>> supported on 64-bit platforms.
>> * Register offsets are limited to precisely 32-bit.
>> * IO is performed using readl/writel, with no provision for using the
>> __raw_readl or readl_relaxed variants.
> Also limited native endian register I/O. It would have been much better
> to fix this in the core - please consider producing followup patches to
> push the code there, though it's far from essential.

I assume the solution here is to:

* Always use __raw_readl/__raw_writel in regmap-mmio.c so that there's
never any endianness conversion, and don't use the endianness conversion
macros when reading/writing the work buffer.
* Implement alternative formatters that format in LE instead of BE
* Add a field to regmap_config indicating which endianness the data
should be in, and use this flag to select the LE/BE formatters.

Does that sound about right?

>> +static int regmap_mmio_gather_write(void *context,
>> + const void *reg, size_t reg_size,
>> + const void *val, size_t val_size)
>> +{
>> + struct regmap_mmio_context *ctx = context;
>> + u32 offset;
>> +
>> + if (reg_size != 4)
>> + return -EIO;
> Given that you constrain on registration too this should be BUG_ON(),
> we're seriously confused if we're specifying a different register size
> here and -EIO is going to be a bit obscure.

I wondered about that. I would have been quite happy to repost with that
change. Do you want an incremental patch?

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-05 01:17    [W:0.077 / U:1.444 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site