From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pratheesh@ti.com (TK, Pratheesh Gangadhar) Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 15:49:25 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] PRUSS UIO driver support In-Reply-To: <201102181644.17634.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1298041530-26855-1-git-send-email-pratheesh@ti.com> <1298041530-26855-2-git-send-email-pratheesh@ti.com> <201102181644.17634.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd at arndb.de] > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 9:14 PM > To: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > Cc: TK, Pratheesh Gangadhar; davinci-linux-open- > source at linux.davincidsp.com; gregkh at suse.de; Chatterjee, Amit; > hjk at linutronix.de; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PRUSS UIO driver support > > On Friday 18 February 2011, Pratheesh Gangadhar wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Pratheesh Gangadhar > > > > This patch implements PRUSS (Programmable Real-time Unit Sub System) > > UIO driver which exports SOC resources associated with PRUSS like > > I/O, memories and IRQs to user space. PRUSS is dual 32-bit RISC > > processors which is efficient in performing embedded tasks that > > require manipulation of packed memory mapped data structures and > > efficient in handling system events that have tight real time > > constraints. This driver is currently supported on Texas Instruments > > DA850, AM18xx and OMAPL1-38 devices. > > For example, PRUSS runs firmware for real-time critical industrial > > communication data link layer and communicates with application stack > > running in user space via shared memory and IRQs. > > Looks basically ok, but there are two limitations that I see that you > might consider fixing. > > Oh, and you should put the Signed-off-by statement below the changelog, > not above it, but that has nothing to do with the code. > > > +/* > > + * Host event IRQ numbers from PRUSS > > + * 3 PRU_EVTOUT0 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 4 PRU_EVTOUT1 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 5 PRU_EVTOUT2 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 6 PRU_EVTOUT3 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 7 PRU_EVTOUT4 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 8 PRU_EVTOUT5 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 9 PRU_EVTOUT6 PRUSS Interrupt > > + * 10 PRU_EVTOUT7 PRUSS Interrupt > > +*/ > > + > > +#define MAX_PRUSS_EVTOUT_INSTANCE (8) > > + > > +static struct clk *pruss_clk; > > +static struct uio_info *info[MAX_PRUSS_EVTOUT_INSTANCE]; > > +static void *ddr_virt_addr; > > +static dma_addr_t ddr_phy_addr; > > By making all of these static variables, you limit youself to > a single PRUSS instance in the system. It's generally better > to write device drivers in a way that makes it possible to > have multiple instances, e.g. by moving these four variables > into the 'priv' part of struct uio_info. Ok, I agree with making them non-static. Making them part of uio_info might not be desired. PRUSS_EVOUT_INSTANCE is not same as PRUSS instances. Each PRUSS can have up to 8 event out interrupt lines to host ARM. > > > +static irqreturn_t pruss_handler(int irq, struct uio_info *dev_info) > > +{ > > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > > +} > > An empty interrupt handler is rather pointless. I guess you really > notify user space when the interrupt handler gets called, as this > is the main point of a UIO driver as far as I understand it. > As discussed in the later E-mails, UIO core takes care of this. Will cover this in following responses. Thanks, Pratheesh