Re: [PATCH v8 04/16] clk: npcm8xx: add clock controller

Tomer Maimon
2022-08-08T13:08:27Z

Hi Stephen,

Sorry, just to make it clear.

On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 at 15:37, Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2022 at 23:05, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Tomer Maimon (2022-08-04 07:01:30)
> > > On Sat, 30 Jul 2022 at 01:56, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Because it is jumbled in some range?
> > > Yes.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I do see a way to combine the clock and the reset driver, the NPCM
> > > > > reset driver is serving other NPCM BMC's.
> > > > > Should we use regmap to handle the clock registers instead of ioremap?
> > > >
> > > > Sure? Using regmap or not looks like a parallel discussion. How does it
> > > > help use platform APIs?
> > > I mean to use regmap API instead of platform API for handing the clock
> > > and reset registers.
> > > the regmap API gives only one user access to R/W (lock).
> > > I will be happy to get more suggestions, on how should we solve this situation.
> > >
> >
> > Using platform APIs means using platform_*() functions, not of_*()
> > functions, which are open-firmware/DT related. Regmap can be used to
> > operate on registers mapped as __iomem, which is different from platform
> > APIs.
> I will use platform_get_resource() and devm_ioremap_resource()
> functions in the next version.
I will use platform_get_resource() and ioremap() function next
veriosn, is it fine?
>
> >
> > Is having a lock even necessary? Do the reset and clk controls live
> You are right, lock use is not necessary.
> > within a shared register where we would need to prevent one driver from
> > accessing that register at the same time as the other?
> reset and clk drivers are living fine with shared registers, we don't
> need to handle the register access between the clk and the reset
> drivers.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tomer

Best regards,

Tomer