From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:52:29 +0200
Subject: [RFC, PATCH] clocksource: provide timekeeping for efm32 SoCs
In-Reply-To: <20130926082059.GI16106@pengutronix.de>
References: <1379324644-20934-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
<5242F434.7060702@linaro.org> <20130925153207.GG16106@pengutronix.de>
<524376A0.7020405@linaro.org> <20130926082059.GI16106@pengutronix.de>
Message-ID: <5243F5CD.6090709@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org
On 09/26/2013 10:20 AM, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 01:49:52AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 09/25/2013 05:32 PM, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
>>>>> +static void __init efm32_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + static int has_clocksource, has_clockevent;
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!has_clocksource) {
>>>>> + ret = efm32_clocksource_init(np);
>>>>> + if (!ret) {
>>>>> + has_clocksource = 1;
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!has_clockevent) {
>>>>> + ret = efm32_clockevent_init(np);
>>>>> + if (!ret) {
>>>>> + has_clockevent = 1;
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> I don't get the purpose of this initialization, can you explain ?
>>> An efm32 SoC has four timer blocks. A single block can only be used for
>>> one of clocksource or clockevent device and having more than one
>>> clocksource or clockevent device doesn't make sense. So this routine
>>> asserts that the first timer is used as clocksource and the second as
>>> clockevent device. The others are unused.
>>
>> Shouldn't be up to the dt to give the timers you want ?
> The dt looks as follows:
>
> timer0: timer at 40010000 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010000 0x400>;
> interrupts = <2>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER0>;
> };
>
> timer1: timer at 40010400 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010400 0x400>;
> interrupts = <12>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER1>;
> };
>
> timer2: timer at 40010800 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010800 0x400>;
> interrupts = <13>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER2>;
> };
>
> timer3: timer at 40010c00 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010c00 0x400>;
> interrupts = <14>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER3>;
> };
>
> What is your suggestion now?
> Add a property that specifies if the block
> should be used as clocksource or clockevent_device? That isn't a
> hardware description and so shouldn't go into the device tree.
At this point, I just asked a question and did not make any suggestion.
> Provide two drivers that match on "efm32,timer", one for clocksource and
> another for clockevent_device? That wouldn't work, too, as the first
> driver to be loaded would grab all four timers and the second would get
> none.
Thanks, now I understand the purpose of this routine, it is very similar
than:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg273984.html
right ?
--
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook |
Twitter |
Blog
From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path:
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
id S1752858Ab3IZIwe (ORCPT );
Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:52:34 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:60570 "EHLO
mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
with ESMTP id S1751471Ab3IZIwc (ORCPT
);
Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:52:32 -0400
Message-ID: <5243F5CD.6090709@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:52:29 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?UTF-8?B?VXdlIEtsZWluZS1Lw7ZuaWc=?=
CC: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kernel@pengutronix.de,
John Stultz
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] clocksource: provide timekeeping for efm32 SoCs
References: <1379324644-20934-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <5242F434.7060702@linaro.org> <20130925153207.GG16106@pengutronix.de> <524376A0.7020405@linaro.org> <20130926082059.GI16106@pengutronix.de>
In-Reply-To: <20130926082059.GI16106@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID:
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
On 09/26/2013 10:20 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 01:49:52AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 09/25/2013 05:32 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>>>>> +static void __init efm32_timer_init(struct device_node *np)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + static int has_clocksource, has_clockevent;
>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!has_clocksource) {
>>>>> + ret = efm32_clocksource_init(np);
>>>>> + if (!ret) {
>>>>> + has_clocksource = 1;
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (!has_clockevent) {
>>>>> + ret = efm32_clockevent_init(np);
>>>>> + if (!ret) {
>>>>> + has_clockevent = 1;
>>>>> + return;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> I don't get the purpose of this initialization, can you explain ?
>>> An efm32 SoC has four timer blocks. A single block can only be used for
>>> one of clocksource or clockevent device and having more than one
>>> clocksource or clockevent device doesn't make sense. So this routine
>>> asserts that the first timer is used as clocksource and the second as
>>> clockevent device. The others are unused.
>>
>> Shouldn't be up to the dt to give the timers you want ?
> The dt looks as follows:
>
> timer0: timer@40010000 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010000 0x400>;
> interrupts = <2>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER0>;
> };
>
> timer1: timer@40010400 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010400 0x400>;
> interrupts = <12>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER1>;
> };
>
> timer2: timer@40010800 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010800 0x400>;
> interrupts = <13>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER2>;
> };
>
> timer3: timer@40010c00 {
> compatible = "efm32,timer";
> reg = <0x40010c00 0x400>;
> interrupts = <14>;
> clocks = <&cmu clk_HFPERCLKTIMER3>;
> };
>
> What is your suggestion now?
> Add a property that specifies if the block
> should be used as clocksource or clockevent_device? That isn't a
> hardware description and so shouldn't go into the device tree.
At this point, I just asked a question and did not make any suggestion.
> Provide two drivers that match on "efm32,timer", one for clocksource and
> another for clockevent_device? That wouldn't work, too, as the first
> driver to be loaded would grab all four timers and the second would get
> none.
Thanks, now I understand the purpose of this routine, it is very similar
than:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg273984.html
right ?
--
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook |
Twitter |
Blog