From: David Brown <davidb-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: Point-to-point bus in device tree
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 13:08:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120405200829.GA29747@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F7DF142.5050601-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:23:46PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 04/05/2012 12:15 PM, David Brown wrote:
> > Some MSM SoCs have a small serial-type "bus" that is used to
> > communicate with the PMIC devices. This interface is always
> > point-to-point. I'm doing a device-tree conversion of the driver that
> > Ken Heitke posted last year <https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/17/503>.
> >
> > A naive conversion to device tree, would result in something like
> > this:
> >
> > qcom,ssbi@500000 {
> > compatible = "qcom,ssbi";
> > reg = <0x500000 0x1000>;
> > qcom,controller-type = "ssbi";
> >
> > qcom,pmic8058@0 {
> > reg = <0x0 0x01>;
> > ...
> > }
> > }
> >
> > There would end up being an extraneous register for the device on the
> > other end (there are no addresses), and there would need to be code in
> > the ssbi driver to traverse this small tree to find these nodes.
>
> Isn't that extra code simply:
>
> of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);
>
> That seems like pretty low overhead.
True, but it still bothers me to have to have a bogus register.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: davidb@codeaurora.org (David Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Point-to-point bus in device tree
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 13:08:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120405200829.GA29747@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F7DF142.5050601@wwwdotorg.org>
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:23:46PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 04/05/2012 12:15 PM, David Brown wrote:
> > Some MSM SoCs have a small serial-type "bus" that is used to
> > communicate with the PMIC devices. This interface is always
> > point-to-point. I'm doing a device-tree conversion of the driver that
> > Ken Heitke posted last year <https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/17/503>.
> >
> > A naive conversion to device tree, would result in something like
> > this:
> >
> > qcom,ssbi at 500000 {
> > compatible = "qcom,ssbi";
> > reg = <0x500000 0x1000>;
> > qcom,controller-type = "ssbi";
> >
> > qcom,pmic8058 at 0 {
> > reg = <0x0 0x01>;
> > ...
> > }
> > }
> >
> > There would end up being an extraneous register for the device on the
> > other end (there are no addresses), and there would need to be code in
> > the ssbi driver to traverse this small tree to find these nodes.
>
> Isn't that extra code simply:
>
> of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);
>
> That seems like pretty low overhead.
True, but it still bothers me to have to have a bogus register.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Point-to-point bus in device tree
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 13:08:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120405200829.GA29747@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F7DF142.5050601@wwwdotorg.org>
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 01:23:46PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 04/05/2012 12:15 PM, David Brown wrote:
> > Some MSM SoCs have a small serial-type "bus" that is used to
> > communicate with the PMIC devices. This interface is always
> > point-to-point. I'm doing a device-tree conversion of the driver that
> > Ken Heitke posted last year <https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/17/503>.
> >
> > A naive conversion to device tree, would result in something like
> > this:
> >
> > qcom,ssbi@500000 {
> > compatible = "qcom,ssbi";
> > reg = <0x500000 0x1000>;
> > qcom,controller-type = "ssbi";
> >
> > qcom,pmic8058@0 {
> > reg = <0x0 0x01>;
> > ...
> > }
> > }
> >
> > There would end up being an extraneous register for the device on the
> > other end (there are no addresses), and there would need to be code in
> > the ssbi driver to traverse this small tree to find these nodes.
>
> Isn't that extra code simply:
>
> of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);
>
> That seems like pretty low overhead.
True, but it still bothers me to have to have a bogus register.
David
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-05 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-05 18:15 Point-to-point bus in device tree David Brown
2012-04-05 18:15 ` David Brown
2012-04-05 18:15 ` David Brown
2012-04-05 19:23 ` Stephen Warren
2012-04-05 19:23 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <4F7DF142.5050601-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
2012-04-05 20:08 ` David Brown [this message]
2012-04-05 20:08 ` David Brown
2012-04-05 20:08 ` David Brown
2012-04-06 15:16 ` David Brown
2012-04-06 15:16 ` David Brown
2012-04-07 1:27 ` Grant Likely
2012-04-07 1:27 ` Grant Likely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120405200829.GA29747@codeaurora.org \
--to=davidb-sgv2jx0feol9jmxxk+q4oq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.