From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Introduce hardware spinlock framework Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:06:56 -0800 Message-ID: <20101214170656.GA3832@kroah.com> References: <1291420247-18171-1-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ohad Ben-Cohen Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Tony Lindgren , Benoit Cousson , Grant Likely , Hari Kanigeri , Suman Anna , Kevin Hilman , Arnd Bergmann List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 04:31:36PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > Hi Greg, Tony, >=20 > On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrot= e: > > OMAP4 introduces a Hardware Spinlock device, which provides hardwar= e > > assistance for synchronization and mutual exclusion between heterog= eneous > > processors and those not operating under a single, shared operating= system > > (e.g. OMAP4 has dual Cortex-A9, dual Cortex-M3 and a C64x+ DSP). > > > > The intention of this hardware device is to allow remote processors= , > > that have no alternative mechanism to accomplish synchronization an= d mutual > > exclusion operations, to share resources (such as memory and/or any= other > > hardware resource). > > > > This patchset adds hwspinlock framework that makes it possible > > for drivers to use those hwspinlock devices and stay platform-indep= endent. >=20 > ... >=20 > > =A0Documentation/hwspinlock.txt =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A029= 9 +++++++++++++++ > > =A0arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0 =A0= 1 + > > =A0arch/arm/mach-omap2/hwspinlock.c =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0 63 ++= ++ > > =A0arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c | =A0 64 ++++ > > =A0drivers/Kconfig =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0| =A0 =A02 + > > =A0drivers/Makefile =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 | =A0 =A01 + > > =A0drivers/hwspinlock/Kconfig =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0= 22 ++ > > =A0drivers/hwspinlock/Makefile =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0| =A0= =A06 + > > =A0drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock.h =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0| =A0 61 = +++ > > =A0drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_core.c =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0557 ++++++= ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > =A0drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0231 ++++++= ++++++ > > =A0include/linux/hwspinlock.h =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 | =A0= 298 +++++++++++++++ > > =A012 files changed, 1605 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >=20 > Can you please have a look and say if this looks OK ? Look at what, I don't see a patch here. I've seen a lot of discussion about this, are all of the review comment= s now addressed? Like the most important one, why is this generic code i= f it's only for one specific platform? thanks, greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: greg@kroah.com (Greg KH) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:06:56 -0800 Subject: [PATCH v3 0/4] Introduce hardware spinlock framework In-Reply-To: References: <1291420247-18171-1-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com> Message-ID: <20101214170656.GA3832@kroah.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 04:31:36PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > Hi Greg, Tony, > > On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > > OMAP4 introduces a Hardware Spinlock device, which provides hardware > > assistance for synchronization and mutual exclusion between heterogeneous > > processors and those not operating under a single, shared operating system > > (e.g. OMAP4 has dual Cortex-A9, dual Cortex-M3 and a C64x+ DSP). > > > > The intention of this hardware device is to allow remote processors, > > that have no alternative mechanism to accomplish synchronization and mutual > > exclusion operations, to share resources (such as memory and/or any other > > hardware resource). > > > > This patchset adds hwspinlock framework that makes it possible > > for drivers to use those hwspinlock devices and stay platform-independent. > > ... > > > ?Documentation/hwspinlock.txt ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ?299 +++++++++++++++ > > ?arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?1 + > > ?arch/arm/mach-omap2/hwspinlock.c ? ? ? ? ? | ? 63 ++++ > > ?arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c | ? 64 ++++ > > ?drivers/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? ?2 + > > ?drivers/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?1 + > > ?drivers/hwspinlock/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 22 ++ > > ?drivers/hwspinlock/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? ?6 + > > ?drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock.h ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? 61 +++ > > ?drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_core.c ? ? ? | ?557 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > ?drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c ? ? ? | ?231 ++++++++++++ > > ?include/linux/hwspinlock.h ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ?298 +++++++++++++++ > > ?12 files changed, 1605 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > Can you please have a look and say if this looks OK ? Look at what, I don't see a patch here. I've seen a lot of discussion about this, are all of the review comments now addressed? Like the most important one, why is this generic code if it's only for one specific platform? thanks, greg k-h