From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Mike Turquette <mturquette@ti.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dt: describe base reset signal binding
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:47:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5091AA73.10905@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121031103221.18780.43096@nucleus>
On 10/31/2012 04:32 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Stephen Warren (2012-10-30 11:02:05)
>> On 10/29/2012 12:32 PM, Mike Turquette wrote:
>>> Quoting Stephen Warren (2012-10-23 14:45:56)
>>>> What do people think of this? Does it sound like a good idea to go ahead
>>>> with a reset subsystem? Should we simply add a new API to the common clock
>>>> subsystem instead (and assume that reset and clock domains match 1:1).
>>>> Should this be implemented as part of the generic power management domains;
>>>> see include/linux/pm_domain.h instead?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>
>>> I'm not sure a "reset subsystem" is necessary, but I also do not like
>>> using clocks as the keys for IP reset.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you're suggesting as an alternative to a reset
>> subsystem (or API if you want something that sounds smaller!) :-)
>
> My point was that I do not know if a new subsystem is necessary or not.
> Your suggestion to "simply add a new API to the common clock subsystem"
> is an example of an alternative to a whole new subsystem. However I
> instinctively feel that the clock api is not the right place for
> reseting devices.
driver/base/power is about the only related place I can think of given a
quick look. However, in a similar way to clocks, I don't think there's
necessarily a 1:1 relationship between power domains and reset domains
either, so driver/base/power doesn't feel like a good fit in just the
same way that drivers/clk doesn't.
I wonder if a drivers/base/reset/ or drivers/base/reset.c would be
appropriate?
>>> I think it is more common to map IPs to struct device, no?
>>
>> It is indeed probably common that there's a 1:1 mapping between IP
>> blocks and struct device. However, I'm sure there are plenty of
>> counter-examples; IP blocks with multiple reset domains (hence struct
>> devices that encompass multiple reset domains, or reset domains that
>> encompass multiple struct devices), just as there are many examples of
>> non-1:1 mappings between struct device and struct clk.
>
> In OMAP code we handle IP resets through the hwmod code and I prefer
> that IP-centric approach to associating IP resets with a clock node.
> Perhaps the hwmod approach could serve as inspiration for a new generic
> way to reset modules.
OK, I'm not even slightly familiar with the hwmod code, but I keep
hearing about it, so I'll go take a quick look.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-31 22:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-23 21:45 [RFC PATCH] dt: describe base reset signal binding Stephen Warren
2012-10-29 18:32 ` Mike Turquette
2012-10-30 18:02 ` Stephen Warren
[not found] ` <20121031103221.18780.43096@nucleus>
2012-10-31 22:47 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5091AA73.10905@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mturquette@ti.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=swarren@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox