On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 4:48 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 08-09-20, 16:41, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On 0908, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 08-09-20, 13:27, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > > > Use regmap for accessing cpufreq registers in hardware. > > > > > > Why ? Please mention why a change is required in the log. > > > > > > > Only because it is recommended to use regmap for abstracting the hw access. > > Yes it can be very useful in abstracting the hw access in case of > busses like SPI/I2C, others, but in this case there is only one way of > doing it with the exact same registers. I am not sure it is worth it > here. FWIW, I have never played with regmaps personally, and so every > chance I can be wrong here. One could handle the reg offsets through a struct initialisation, but then you end up with lots of #defines for bitmasks and bits for each version of the IP. And the core code becomes a bit convoluted IMO, trying to handle the differences. regmap hides the differences of the bit positions and register offsets between several IP versions. > > Moreover it handles the proper locking for us in the core (spinlock vs mutex). > > What locking do you need here ? Right, locking isn't the main reason here. > > > I've seen many subsystem maintainers prefer regmap over plain readl/writel > > calls. I'll add the reason in commit log. > > I am not sure if it is worth it here.
