Nishanth Menon <menon.nishanth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/09/2010 05:51 AM, Venkatraman S wrote: >> >> Nishanth Menon<nm@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Chikkature Rajashekar, Madhusudhan had written, on 05/07/2010 11:59 AM, >>> the >>> following: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] omap hsmmc: adaptation of sdma >>>>> >>>>> descriptor >>>>>>> >>>>>>> autoloading feature >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <<snip>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am not clear about the method. The board files export the >>>>>>>>>> omap_mmc_platform_data. >>>>>>>>>> Does it imply that all board files have to change and export >>>>>>>>>> the capability so that it can be queried ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No. You don't have to modify the board files. This would need >>>>>>>>> change in devices.c which common for all omap boards. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't have a strong opinion on this point but just put forth an >>>>>>>>> alternate way to avoid such SOC specific check in drivers. >>>>>>>>> You can take call on this >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Agree. How about adding a flag in hsmmc.h& omap_mmc_platform_data, >>>>>>>> that would take care of SDMA& SDMA_DLAOD in the driver instead >>>>> >>>>> going >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> with SOC check . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Good idea Kishore. >>>>>>> Venkat, >>>>>>> Can you do what kishore is suggesting. >>>>>>> >>>>>> omap_mmc_platform_data is MMC specific platform data. Why add a SDMA >>>>>> specific feature capability into it? Even though you add it there, you >>>>> >>>>> will >>>>>> >>>>>> still need to have a cpu check before that can be set in a common >>>>>> code. >>>>>> >>>>> CPU checks are allowed to be in the platform files. That is where such >>>>> machine/SOC specific differentiation should be done and not in the >>>>> device >>>>> drivers. >>>>> That way device drivers remains clean and portable. >>>>> >>>>> I want to stop this thread here since neither the patch author nor the >>>>> file >>>>> maintainer thinks that cpu checks in the device drivers is bad idea. >>>>> >>>>> Please decide within yourself and move on. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I am not saying that it is wrong. My point here is that adding this >>>> particular flag into MMC platform data to differentiate a SDMA specific >>>> feature which got introduced post certain SOC may not be needed. But you >>>> can >>>> always post your comments on the list which will be looked at by a wider >>>> audience and finally the right patch will go in. >>> >>> Please see [1] for SOC specific feature handling. any reasons we can't >>> handle it by adding a new feature? >>> >>> [1] >>> >>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h#l439 >>> >> >> Thanks. I can add a new feature here, but I see that the API is tied >> to OMAP3, whereas the DMA feature is common >> to 3630, OMAP4 and mostly everything after that. I can work on an >> upgrade, but do you see that >> as a dependency and done on the context of this patch ? >> Regards, >> Venkat. > > Yes, I am aware that the current APIs are tied to OMAP3, no reason that we > cant introduce a OMAP version independent feature.. Yes, IMHO, this is an > SOC specific feature that has no place in a platform data.. lets not misuse > that. > Regards, > NM Draft patch for this is here (Tested ok). I will post this as part of the series if this looks ok... This doesn't have all existing feature checks for OMAP4, but they seem to be not needed/used anyway.. --- arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c | 2 - arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c | 25 +++++++++++++++-------- arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h | 36 +++++++++++++++++----------------- 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) Index: linux-omap-2.6/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c =================================================================== --- linux-omap-2.6.orig/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c 2010-05-09 23:29:28.000000000 +0530 +++ linux-omap-2.6/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c 2010-05-10 17:39:29.000000000 +0530 @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ static struct omap_chip_id omap_chip; static unsigned int omap_revision; -u32 omap3_features; +u32 omap_features; unsigned int omap_rev(void) { @@ -161,14 +161,14 @@ #define OMAP3_CHECK_FEATURE(status,feat) \ if (((status & OMAP3_ ##feat## _MASK) \ >> OMAP3_ ##feat## _SHIFT) != FEAT_ ##feat## _NONE) { \ - omap3_features |= OMAP3_HAS_ ##feat; \ + omap_features |= OMAP_HAS_ ##feat; \ } void __init omap3_check_features(void) { u32 status; - omap3_features = 0; + omap_features = 0; status = omap_ctrl_readl(OMAP3_CONTROL_OMAP_STATUS); @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ OMAP3_CHECK_FEATURE(status, NEON); OMAP3_CHECK_FEATURE(status, ISP); if (cpu_is_omap3630()) - omap3_features |= OMAP3_HAS_192MHZ_CLK; + omap_features |= OMAP_HAS_192MHZ_CLK | OMAP_HAS_SDMA_DLOAD; /* * TODO: Get additional info (where applicable) @@ -267,6 +267,12 @@ } } +void __init omap4_check_features(void) +{ + omap_features = OMAP_HAS_SDMA_DLOAD; + +} + void __init omap4_check_revision(void) { u32 idcode; @@ -294,7 +300,7 @@ } #define OMAP3_SHOW_FEATURE(feat) \ - if (omap3_has_ ##feat()) \ + if (omap_has_ ##feat()) \ printk(#feat" "); void __init omap3_cpuinfo(void) @@ -314,20 +320,20 @@ /* * AM35xx devices */ - if (omap3_has_sgx()) { + if (omap_has_sgx()) { omap_revision = OMAP3517_REV(rev); strcpy(cpu_name, "AM3517"); } else { /* Already set in omap3_check_revision() */ strcpy(cpu_name, "AM3505"); } - } else if (omap3_has_iva() && omap3_has_sgx()) { + } else if (omap_has_iva() && omap_has_sgx()) { /* OMAP3430, OMAP3525, OMAP3515, OMAP3503 devices */ strcpy(cpu_name, "OMAP3430/3530"); - } else if (omap3_has_iva()) { + } else if (omap_has_iva()) { omap_revision = OMAP3525_REV(rev); strcpy(cpu_name, "OMAP3525"); - } else if (omap3_has_sgx()) { + } else if (omap_has_sgx()) { omap_revision = OMAP3515_REV(rev); strcpy(cpu_name, "OMAP3515"); } else { @@ -386,6 +392,7 @@ return; } else if (cpu_is_omap44xx()) { omap4_check_revision(); + omap4_check_features(); return; } else { pr_err("OMAP revision unknown, please fix!\n"); Index: linux-omap-2.6/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h =================================================================== --- linux-omap-2.6.orig/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h 2010-05-09 23:24:15.000000000 +0530 +++ linux-omap-2.6/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h 2010-05-10 17:53:04.000000000 +0530 @@ -434,28 +434,30 @@ void omap2_check_revision(void); /* - * Runtime detection of OMAP3 features + * Runtime detection of OMAP features */ -extern u32 omap3_features; +extern u32 omap_features; -#define OMAP3_HAS_L2CACHE BIT(0) -#define OMAP3_HAS_IVA BIT(1) -#define OMAP3_HAS_SGX BIT(2) -#define OMAP3_HAS_NEON BIT(3) -#define OMAP3_HAS_ISP BIT(4) -#define OMAP3_HAS_192MHZ_CLK BIT(5) +#define OMAP_HAS_L2CACHE BIT(0) +#define OMAP_HAS_IVA BIT(1) +#define OMAP_HAS_SGX BIT(2) +#define OMAP_HAS_NEON BIT(3) +#define OMAP_HAS_ISP BIT(4) +#define OMAP_HAS_192MHZ_CLK BIT(5) +#define OMAP_HAS_SDMA_DLOAD BIT(6) -#define OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(feat,flag) \ -static inline unsigned int omap3_has_ ##feat(void) \ +#define OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(feat, flag) \ +static inline unsigned int omap_has_ ##feat(void) \ { \ - return (omap3_features & OMAP3_HAS_ ##flag); \ + return (omap_features & OMAP_HAS_ ##flag); \ } \ -OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(l2cache, L2CACHE) -OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(sgx, SGX) -OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(iva, IVA) -OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(neon, NEON) -OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(isp, ISP) -OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(192mhz_clk, 192MHZ_CLK) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(l2cache, L2CACHE) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(sgx, SGX) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(iva, IVA) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(neon, NEON) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(isp, ISP) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(192mhz_clk, 192MHZ_CLK) +OMAP_HAS_FEATURE(sdma_dload, SDMA_DLOAD) #endif Index: linux-omap-2.6/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c =================================================================== --- linux-omap-2.6.orig/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c 2010-05-10 14:41:39.000000000 +0530 +++ linux-omap-2.6/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c 2010-05-10 14:41:50.000000000 +0530 @@ -3510,7 +3510,7 @@ cpu_clkflg |= CK_3430ES2; } } - if (omap3_has_192mhz_clk()) + if (omap_has_192mhz_clk()) omap_96m_alwon_fck = omap_96m_alwon_fck_3630; if (cpu_is_omap3630()) { -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
