From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexandre Courbot Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:06:26 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v7 0/3] Runtime Interpreter Power Sequences Message-Id: <1350637589-7405-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Stephen Warren , Thierry Reding , Simon Glass , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Mark Brown , Anton Vorontsov , David Woodhouse , Arnd Bergmann Cc: Leela Krishna Amudala , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Alexandre Courbot Quite a big redesign of the feature - both structures and code have been simplified and should be easier to read and understand, data duplication is avoided, and much less memory allocations take place at runtime. Usage interface is also simpler and IMHO more logical. What happened is that platform_power_seq and power_seq have been merged, and so power sequences declared as platform data are used "as-is". The "build" step is not needed anymore - resources are allocated when a power sequence is added into a set. There is still one design flaw that I would like to solve: sequences are still tied to a device, i.e. if you have two devices that use the same powering scheme, you have to declare two identical power sequences and assign each of these to one device. It would be much more flexible if sequences could be shared across devices. The problem is that the resources structure, references by steps, cannot be shared. Actually we could share it by having a linked list of devices and resolved resources in the resource structure and thus share power sequences over devices. That would work for regulator and PWM resources, which have a get_regulator/pwm(dev, id) function that could return a different resource depending on the device that is passed. But there is no similar get_gpio() function for GPIOs which number is directly specified in the resource, and I don't know if such a function would make sense otherwise. Opinions on the subject are welcome. Alexandre Courbot (3): Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences pwm_backlight: use power sequences tegra: ventana: add PWM backlight to device tree .../devicetree/bindings/power/power_seq.txt | 121 +++++++ .../bindings/video/backlight/pwm-backlight.txt | 72 +++- Documentation/power/power_seq.txt | 253 ++++++++++++++ arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-ventana.dts | 59 +++- drivers/power/Kconfig | 1 + drivers/power/Makefile | 1 + drivers/power/power_seq/Kconfig | 2 + drivers/power/power_seq/Makefile | 1 + drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq.c | 376 +++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_delay.c | 65 ++++ drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_gpio.c | 94 ++++++ drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_pwm.c | 82 +++++ drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_regulator.c | 83 +++++ drivers/video/backlight/Kconfig | 1 + drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c | 161 +++++++-- include/linux/power_seq.h | 203 +++++++++++ include/linux/pwm_backlight.h | 18 +- 17 files changed, 1553 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_seq.txt create mode 100644 Documentation/power/power_seq.txt create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/Kconfig create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/Makefile create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq.c create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_delay.c create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_gpio.c create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_pwm.c create mode 100644 drivers/power/power_seq/power_seq_regulator.c create mode 100644 include/linux/power_seq.h -- 1.7.12.3