From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 12:29:57 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max8925: request resource region In-Reply-To: <201205071121.53302.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1336360249-29963-1-git-send-email-haojian.zhuang@gmail.com> <201205071014.03632.arnd@arndb.de> <201205071121.53302.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <20120507112956.GJ4415@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 11:21:53AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Can you explain why you need this kind of arbitration to start with? > Can't you just ensure that each client of the max8925 only sees a fixed > set of nonconflicting registers, and provide a higher-level abstractions > for the registers that are indeed shared between clients? This is nothing to do with arbitration or sharing. It's for the case where you have a set of IP blocks on the chip (and possibly over a series of different chips) all with the same register map within the IP block - you need a way to tell the function driver for the IP block where it is in the chip register map. A similar thing happens (without issue) for the interrupts within the chip. You'd never expect any collisions to need arbitrating, it's purely about telling the function driver where to find the IP without having to open code this. Anything which is actually shared would be handled in the MFD core for the device normally, or with some other API like genirq. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: