lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v11 04/10] soc: mediatek: Add multiple step bus protection control
From
Date


On 13/02/2020 03:15, Weiyi Lu wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 10:23 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>> On 12/02/2020 03:55, Weiyi Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 18:49 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 20/12/2019 04:45, Weiyi Lu wrote:
>>>>> Both MT8183 & MT6765 have more control steps of bus protection
>>>>> than previous project. And there add more bus protection registers
>>>>> reside at infracfg & smi-common. Also add new APIs for multiple
>>>>> step bus protection control with more customized arguments.
>>>>> And then use bp_table for bus protection of all compatibles,
>>>>> instead of mixing bus_prot_mask and bus_prot_reg_update.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@mediatek.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile | 2 +-
>>>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c | 117 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/scpsys-ext.h | 67 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 4 files changed, 240 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c
>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/scpsys-ext.h
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile b/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile
>>>>> index b017330..b442be9 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/Makefile
>>>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>>>>> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_CMDQ) += mtk-cmdq-helper.o
>>>>> -obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_INFRACFG) += mtk-infracfg.o
>>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_INFRACFG) += mtk-infracfg.o mtk-scpsys-ext.o
>>>>
>>>> It seems that we would need another patch which get's rid of the mtk-infracfg
>>>> first and then add stuff like the possibility to have different steps.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Actually I have a PATCH 05/11 to remove the mtk-infracfg.
>>> In this patch, I have some changes, like calling
>>> mtk_scpsys_ext_set_bus_protection(...) instead of
>>> mtk_infracfg_set_bus_protection(...) in scpsys_bus_protect_enable(...)
>>> and replacing bus_prot_mask by bp_table.
>>> I thought I should introduce the new method first and remove useless one
>>> later. What do you think?
>>
>> Yes, but first patch would be a step to get rid of mtk-infracfg and a second
>> patch add bp_table and the like.
>>
>
> OK, I'll split into such sequence.
>
>>>
>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_PMIC_WRAP) += mtk-pmic-wrap.o
>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_MTK_SCPSYS) += mtk-scpsys.o
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..df402ac
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys-ext.c
>>>>
>>>> I'm not quite sure why we should put this into a new file. I suppose the
>>>> rational behind it is the fact that we access other blocks through regmap.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, those operation are accross infracfg and smi-common so we put these
>>> into new files.
>>
>> Are you exepct other drivers to use this functions? If not I will have to think
>> again, but I don't see any reason to put it into a new file.
>>
>
> I thought no other driver would use these functions unless there will
> have drivers want to take over the bus protection process by themselves.
>
> Do you prefer just putting these functions into mtk-scpsys.c?
>

Yes I'd prefer that.

Regards,
Matthias

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-13 12:12    [W:0.074 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site