On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla
<srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thankyou all for providing inputs and comments on previous versions of this patchset.
> Here is the v5 of the patchset addressing all the issues raised as
> part of previous versions review.
>
> This patchset adds a new simple NVMEM framework to kernel.
>
> Up until now, NVMEM drivers were stored in drivers/misc, where they all had to
> duplicate pretty much the same code to register a sysfs file, allow in-kernel
> users to access the content of the devices they were driving, etc.
>
> This was also a problem as far as other in-kernel users were involved, since
> the solutions used were pretty much different from on driver to another, there
> was a rather big abstraction leak.
>
> Introduction of this framework aims at solving this. It also introduces DT
> representation for consumer devices to go get the data they require (MAC
> Addresses, SoC/Revision ID, part numbers, and so on) from the NVMEMs.
>
> After learning few things about QCOM qfprom and other eeprom/efuses, which
> has packed fields at bit level. Which makes it important to add support to
> such memories. This version adds support to this type of non volatile
> memories by adding support to bit level nvmem-cells.
>
> Having regmap interface to this framework would give much better
> abstraction for nvmems on different buses.
>
> patch 1-2 Introduces two regmap helper functions.
> patch 3-6 Introduces the NVMEM framework.
> Patch 7 Adds helper functions for nvmems based on mmio.
> Patch 8 migrates an existing driver to nvmem framework.
> Patch 9-10 Adds Qualcomm specific qfprom driver.
> Patch 11 adds entry in MAINTAINERS.
>
> Its also possible to migrate other nvmem drivers to this framework.
>
> Providers APIs:
> nvmem_register/unregister();
>
> Consumers APIs:
> Cell based apis for both DT/Non-DT:
> nvmem_cell_get()/nvmem_cell_put();
> nvmem_cell_read()/nvmem_cell_write();
>
> Raw byte access apis for both DT/non-DT.
> nvmem_device_get()/nvmem_device_put()
> nvmem_device_read()/nvmem_device_write();
> nvmem_device_cell_read()/nvmem_device_cell_write();
>
> Device Tree:
>
> /* Provider */
> qfprom: qfprom@00700000 {
> ...
>
> /* Data cells */
> tsens_calibration: calib@404 {
> reg = <0x404 0x10>;
> };
>
> tsens_calibration_bckp: calib_bckp@504 {
> reg = <0x504 0x11>;
> bit-offset = 6;
> nbits = 128;
> };
>
> pvs_version: pvs-version@6 {
> reg = <0x6 0x2>
> bit-offset = 7;
> nbits = 2;
> };
>
> speed_bin: speed-bin@c{
> reg = <0xc 0x1>;
> bit-offset = 2;
> nbits = 3;
>
> };
> ...
> };
>
> userspace interface: binary file in /sys/class/nvmem/*/nvmem
>
> ex:
> hexdump /sys/class/nvmem/qfprom0/nvmem
>
> 0000000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000
> *
> 00000a0 db10 2240 0000 e000 0c00 0c00 0000 0c00
> 0000000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000
> ...
> *
> 0001000
>
> Changes since v4(https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/30/725)
> * rename eeprom to nvmem suggested by Matt Porter
Apologies for the bikeshed fly-by review, but given we already have
NVME and are adding an NVDIMM driver sub-system is s/eeprom/nvmem/ a
good idea?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
