All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: snjw23@gmail.com (Sylwester Nawrocki)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Handling device shared SFR on dt platform
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 22:35:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7CB0A6.7010809@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120403160454.BDFF23E0598@localhost>

On 04/03/2012 06:04 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>> What concerns me, is an overhead from region request/ioremap(?)/release, 
>> just to access a single 32-bit register. I'm going to see if those accesses
>> could be moved to only device driver's probe() and remove() callbacks and 
>> what might be the resulting power consumption increase from that, if any.
> 
> Personally, I'd just create a shared function used by both drivers to
> access the register and protect it with a spinlock.  That way the
> region only needs to be mapped once, and the overhead is as low as
> possible.

Hmm, that's what I originally started with. I've just removed function 
callback from the platform data struct in favour of having the drivers 
using directly the function exported by plat-s5p. Then I started devising
something alternative, in hope to get rid of the drivers compilation 
dependency on PLAT_S5P. There seems little point in that though, since 
the chance to have those IP blocks available on other archs or ARM sub-archs,
than Samsung S5P/Exynos, are extremely low. 

I'll post finally some patches for review. Thank you.

---
Regards,
Sylwester

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sylwester Nawrocki <snjw23-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: Handling device shared SFR on dt platform
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 22:35:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F7CB0A6.7010809@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120403160454.BDFF23E0598@localhost>

On 04/03/2012 06:04 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>> What concerns me, is an overhead from region request/ioremap(?)/release, 
>> just to access a single 32-bit register. I'm going to see if those accesses
>> could be moved to only device driver's probe() and remove() callbacks and 
>> what might be the resulting power consumption increase from that, if any.
> 
> Personally, I'd just create a shared function used by both drivers to
> access the register and protect it with a spinlock.  That way the
> region only needs to be mapped once, and the overhead is as low as
> possible.

Hmm, that's what I originally started with. I've just removed function 
callback from the platform data struct in favour of having the drivers 
using directly the function exported by plat-s5p. Then I started devising
something alternative, in hope to get rid of the drivers compilation 
dependency on PLAT_S5P. There seems little point in that though, since 
the chance to have those IP blocks available on other archs or ARM sub-archs,
than Samsung S5P/Exynos, are extremely low. 

I'll post finally some patches for review. Thank you.

---
Regards,
Sylwester

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-04 20:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-21 22:38 Handling device shared SFR on dt platform Sylwester Nawrocki
2012-03-21 22:38 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2012-03-24 19:32 ` Grant Likely
2012-03-24 19:32   ` Grant Likely
2012-03-28 19:45   ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2012-03-28 19:45     ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2012-04-03 16:04     ` Grant Likely
2012-04-03 16:04       ` Grant Likely
2012-04-04 20:35       ` Sylwester Nawrocki [this message]
2012-04-04 20:35         ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2012-04-07  1:41         ` Grant Likely
2012-04-07  1:41           ` 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=4F7CB0A6.7010809@gmail.com \
    --to=snjw23@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.