From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753964AbbCLLOl (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Mar 2015 07:14:41 -0400 Received: from seldrel01.sonyericsson.com ([212.209.106.2]:8441 "EHLO seldrel01.sonyericsson.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753891AbbCLLOi (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Mar 2015 07:14:38 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 04:14:31 -0700 From: Bjorn Andersson To: Mark Rutland CC: Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , Ohad Ben-Cohen , Kumar Gala , Suman Anna , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , Jeffrey Hugo , Andy Gross , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] DT: hwspinlock: Add binding documentation for Qualcomm hwmutex Message-ID: <20150312111430.GU26334@sonymobile.com> References: <1425076217-10415-1-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> <20150312095136.GA30145@leverpostej> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150312095136.GA30145@leverpostej> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 12 Mar 02:51 PDT 2015, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:30:16PM +0000, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > Add binding documentation for the Qualcomm Hardware Mutex. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson > > --- > > > > I think the conclusion on the dt binding discussion for hwspinlocks was that > > we're down to having the #hwlock-cells intact. So this version includes that, > > but non of the other previously discussed properties. > > > > Changes since v5: > > - Extracted the dt binding documentation into a separate patch > > - Moved the driver to consume a syscon > > I'm a little confused here. Why are we now using a syscon? I thought the > set of registers for the block was well-defined. > The sfpb-mutex registers make up a block (according to my documentation), but after discussing tcsr with Andy Gross we concluded that although the tcsr-mutex registers are layed out consecutively in the tcsr, they are not alone in the block. Further more Andy introduced the tcsr-syscon binding in his work to support DMA on GSBI (uart/i2c/spi), so that's why I had to make this change. Preferrably this would have showed up before v6... > If there's a link to some previous discussion on that point, it would be > helpful. > Unfortunately there isn't, as we discussed this mainly face to face a few weeks back. Regards, Bjorn