From: robert.jarzmik@free.fr (Robert Jarzmik)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] rtc: sa1100: convert to run-time register mapping
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 20:18:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8761bg9ngy.fsf@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20150205135037.GP8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 07:34:50AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>> > And just for your information, both rtc-sa1100 and rtc-pxa can be used at the
>> > same time in a pxa kernel.
>>
>> Yes, I know. I find that a bit odd. We'll have a bit of a problem
>> supporting that with DT BTW.
>
> I think you're close to that problem without DT anyway. You modify
> rtc-sa1100 to use devm_ioremap_resource(), which claims the memory
> resource exclusively, thus marking the memory region exclusive.
Ah yes, I have not caught that one.
> Luckily, rtc-pxa uses devm_ioremap() without claiming the memory
> resource - which is the only saving grace for why it still works.
> If rtc-pxa were to be converted to use devm_ioremap_resource(), then
> they'll become mutually exclusive.
True.
Since the pxa-rtc begin ([1] and [2]), the idea was that both rtc-pxa and
rtc-sa1100 could work in the same kernel, each handling a part of RTC
functionality.
Retrospectively, I think I made an error there, when I agreed the pxa2xx had 2
distinct RTC IPs. The sharing of ioresource as well of the IRQ should have made
me decide it was a _single_ IP.
And it's only a matter of time until rtc-pxa claims the resources too I think,
probably by some device-tree push.
As a consequence, I'm pretty much in favor of :
- making rtc-pxa and rtc-sa1100 exclusive
- adding to rtc-pxa driver :
- a new rtc device (ie. it will register 2 rtc devices, one of the sa1100
kind, one of the pxa specific kind)
This has flaws :
- a bit of code will be duplicated between rtc-pxa and rtc-sa1100
- the ordering in rtc-pxa between the 2 rtc devices will be important, as if I
remember correctly /dev/rtc points to the first /dev/rtc0 registered
But it opens up :
- DT path to both drivers
- isolation between sa1100 architecture changes and pxa architecture changes
- Rob's current patches can remain almost the same
> Also note that by including the resource in rtc-sa1100's platform
> device resource list, you'll have stacked resources between the two
> platform devices appearing in /proc/iomem (you did look at that
> before posting the patches, right?)
I must admit I don't know if there are nasty consequences, I think I need to
follow up the code to have a clear idea.
Cheers.
--
Robert
A bit of history for sa1100/pxa-rtc split :
[1]
http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20081001.191833.4d220566.en.html
[2]
http://archive.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20081010.072816.93bd675d.en.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-05 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-03 23:22 [PATCH 0/4] SA1100 RTC clean-up for ARM64 Rob Herring
2015-02-03 23:22 ` [PATCH 1/4] ARM: pxa: add memory resource to RTC device Rob Herring
2015-02-03 23:22 ` [PATCH 2/4] rtc: sa1100: convert to run-time register mapping Rob Herring
2015-02-04 13:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-02-04 13:44 ` Rob Herring
2015-02-04 13:49 ` Rob Herring
2015-02-04 14:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-02-04 17:30 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-05 13:34 ` Rob Herring
2015-02-05 13:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 19:18 ` Robert Jarzmik [this message]
2015-02-05 20:47 ` Rob Herring
2015-02-06 16:26 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-05 23:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-06 16:20 ` =Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-14 12:22 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-03 23:22 ` [PATCH 3/4] ARM: sa1100: remove unused RTC register definitions Rob Herring
2015-02-03 23:22 ` [PATCH 4/4] ARM: mmp: " Rob Herring
2015-02-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 0/4] SA1100 RTC clean-up for ARM64 Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-04 13:58 ` Rob Herring
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=8761bg9ngy.fsf@free.fr \
--to=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
--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.