Hi Nishanth,
On 7/28/2011 7:53 AM, Menon, Nishanth wrote:
On 11:57-20110722, Felipe Balbi wrote:
[...]
/* Custom OPP enabled for all xM versions */
if (cpu_is_omap3630()) {
- struct omap_hwmod *mh = omap_hwmod_lookup("mpu");
- struct omap_hwmod *dh = omap_hwmod_lookup("iva");
- struct device *dev;
+ struct device *mpu_dev, *iva_dev;
- if (!mh || !dh) {
+ mpu_dev = omap2_get_mpuss_device();
+ iva_dev = omap2_get_iva_device();
out of curiosity again, nothing to do with this patch.
Maybe it would be nicer to have an api such as:
omap2_get_device(name);
there are already four devices to be gotten, if that number grows any
bigger, so will the number of helper functions.
I agree, in fact, on a different topic, I hit the same requirement
here is the patch I had done:
From 9f226def811bd50e4bac02f427604034cef77706 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nishanth Menon<nm@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:02:32 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] OMAP: hwmod: add omap_hwmod_to_device
omap_hwmod_to_device is useful for drivers when they need to
look up the device associated with a hwmod name to map back
into the device structure pointers. These ideally should
be used by drivers in mach directory. This could in effect
replace apis such as omap2_get_mpuss_device,
omap2_get_iva_device, omap2_get_l3_device, omap4_get_dsp_device
etc..
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon<nm@xxxxxx>
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/omap_hwmod.h | 2 +
2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
index 293fa6c..77d01a2 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
@@ -142,6 +142,7 @@
#include "powerdomain.h"
#include<plat/clock.h>
#include<plat/omap_hwmod.h>
+#include<plat/omap_device.h>
I'd rather put that code inside the omap_device.c instead of here.
The omap_device layer is on top of the omap_hwmod.
In order to minimize the dependencies from the low HW description layer
to the omap_device layer, you should maybe define a
omap_device_from_hwmod() function or something similar.
That being said, do we really need to get the device from the hwmod
name? Cannot we use the device name instead?
I do not know all the usecases, that why I'm asking.
Regards,
Benoit
--
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
