On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/29/14 16:45, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 17:06:42 +0300, Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> This was just an example. Of course it has many issues and probaly it is
>>> wrong:) The main goal was to understand does IORESOURCE_REG resource
>>> type and parsing the *reg* properties for non-translatable addresses are
>>> feasible. And also does it acceptable by community and OF platform
>>> maintainers.
>> The use case is actually very different from of_address_to_resource or
>> of_get_address() because those APIs explicitly return physical memory
>> addresses from the CPU perspective. It makes more sense to create a new
>> API that doesn't attempt to translate the reg address. Alternately, a
>> new API that only translates upto a given parent node.
>
> The most important thing is that platform_get_resource{_by_name}(&pdev,
> IORESOURCE_REG, n) returns the reg property and optional size encoded
> into a struct resource. I think Rob is suggesting we circumvent the
> entire of_address_to_resource() path and do some if
> (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && type == IORESOURCE_REG) check in
> platform_get_resource() to package up the reg property into a struct
> resource. That should work.
No, I'm saying why are you using platform_get_resource at all and
adding a new resource type? I don't see any advantage.
You might as well do of_property_read_u32 in the below example.
Rob
> It sounds like you think partially translating addresses is risky
> though. Fair enough. Perhaps we should call WARN() if someone tries to
> call platform_get_resource() with IORESOURCE_REG and the parent node has
> a ranges property that isn't a one-to-one conversion. That way if we
> want to do something like this we can.
>
> pmic@0 {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
> reg = <0>;
>
> regulators {
> ranges;
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
>
> regulator@40 {
> reg = <0x40>;
> };
>
> regulator@50 {
> reg = <0x50>;
> }
> };
> };
>
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
> hosted by The Linux Foundation
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
