* Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [101022 09:54]: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:56:13AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@xxxxxxxxxx> [101020 12:12]: > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Kevin Hilman > > > <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> Let's take the i2c-omap for example. > > > >> > > > >> It sounds like it must have a predefined hwspinlock, but what if: > > > >> > > > >> 1. It will use omap_hwspinlock_request() to dynamically allocate a hwspinlock > > > >> 2. Obviously, the hwspinlock id number must be communicated to the M3 > > > >> BIOS, so the i2c-omap will publish that id using a small shared memory > > > >> entry that will be allocated for this sole purpose > > > >> 3. we will make sure that 1+2 completes before the remote processor is > > > >> taken out of reset > > > > Guys, let's try to come up with a generic interface for this instead of > > polluting the device drivers with more omap specific interfaces. > > > > We really want to keep the drivers generic and platform independent. > > > > Sure we still have some omap specific stuff in the drivers, like > > cpu_is_omapxxxx, and omap specific dma calls, but those will be going > > away. > > > > Unless somebody has better ideas, I suggest we pass a lock function > > in the platform_data to the drivers that need it, and do the omap > > specific nasty stuff in the platform code. > > For those of you going to plumbers, I'll put this on the embedded > microconference agenda when we're talking about common infrastructure. Great, thanks. Tony -- 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
