From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shawn Guo Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/10] ARM: mxs: add ocotp read function Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 18:48:24 +0800 Message-ID: <20110119104823.GD2833@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> References: <1294297998-26930-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@freescale.com> <1294297998-26930-9-git-send-email-shawn.guo@freescale.com> <20110113151939.GX24920@pengutronix.de> <20110114083320.GK26617@pengutronix.de> <20110114131655.GB27583@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: , , , , , , , , , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , , , , To: Sascha Hauer Return-path: Received: from tx2ehsobe001.messaging.microsoft.com ([65.55.88.11]:13938 "EHLO TX2EHSOBE002.bigfish.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751446Ab1ASCs1 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:48:27 -0500 Received: from mail171-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail171-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5245F1A58355 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 02:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS020.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.248]) by mail171-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D8CEA004F for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 02:48:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from az33smr02.freescale.net (az33smr02.freescale.net [10.64.34.200]) by de01egw02.freescale.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p0J2mKpP025752 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 19:48:21 -0700 (MST) Received: from S2101-09.ap.freescale.net (S2101-09.ap.freescale.net [10.192.242.113]) by az33smr02.freescale.net (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id p0J2mJaj004804 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:48:20 -0600 (CST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110114131655.GB27583@freescale.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Sascha, On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 09:16:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 09:33:20AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 04:19:39PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:13:16PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo > > > > --- > > > > Changes for v4: > > > > - Call cpu_relax() during polling > > > >=20 > > > > Changes for v2: > > > > - Add mutex locking for mxs_read_ocotp() > > > > - Use type size_t for count and i > > > > - Add comment for clk_enable/disable skipping > > > > - Add ERROR bit clearing and polling step > > > >=20 > > > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile | 2 +- > > > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/common.h | 1 + > > > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/ocotp.c | 79 +++++++++++++++= ++++++++++++++++ > > > > 3 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-mxs/ocotp.c > > > >=20 > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Mak= efile > > > > index 39d3f9c..f23ebbd 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mxs/Makefile > > > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > > > > # Common support > > > > -obj-y :=3D clock.o devices.o gpio.o icoll.o iomux.o system.o t= imer.o > > > > +obj-y :=3D clock.o devices.o gpio.o icoll.o iomux.o ocotp.o sy= stem.o timer.o > > > is it worth to make ocotp optional? (and let evk select > > > CONFIG_MXS_OCOTP) > >=20 > > I think not. > >=20 > I thought it depends on how we think about it. If we think that > ocotp is a block of soc and should be on every system based on > the soc, we should build it unconditional. However, if we think > ocotp is a function that could either be used on a machine or not, > it should be built conditional, so that the machine does not use > ocotp function could save the ocotp build and the memory of > u32 ocotp_words[0x20]. >=20 You've not merged patch #8, #9, #10, so you still think CONFIG_MXS_OCOTP should not be added? --=20 Regards, Shawn