Hi Suman, On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Suman Anna <s-anna@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Do we have a use case today that require the xlate() method? >> >> If not, let's remove it as we could always add it back if some new >> hardware shows up that needs it. > > The xlate() method is to support the phandle + args specifier way of > requesting hwlocks, platform implementations are free to implement their > own xlate functions, but the above supports the simplest case of > controller + relative lock index within controller. Do we have a use case for a different implementation other than the simplest case? If not, it seems to me this will just become redundant boilerplate code (every platform will use the simple xlate method). > This function again is to support the phandle + args specifier way of > requesting hwlocks, the hwspin_lock_request_specific() is invoked > internally within this function, so we are still reusing the actual > request code other than handling the DT parsing portion. If we go back > to using global locks in client hwlocks property, we don't need a > of_hwspin_lock_get_id(), the same can be achieved using the existing DT > function, of_property_read_u32_index(). I think you may have misunderstood me, sorry. I'm ok with the phandle + args specifier. I just think we can use it, together with the base_id property, to infer the global lock id from the DT data. This is not only a must to support heterogenous multi-processing systems, it will also substantially simplify the code. Thanks, Ohad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
