* Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@xxxxxx> [120716 09:01]: > On 07/13/2012 09:15 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > Tony, Tarun, > > How would you feel on replacing omap_dmtimer_request_specific(int id) > with say omap_dm_timer_request_by_cap(int cap)? > > I was thinking of changing the name so that it is clear that the API has > changed. The "int cap" passed to the above function would be an OR of > the appropriate the capabilities flags we have in dmtimer.h ... > > /* timer capabilities used in hwmod database */ > #define OMAP_TIMER_SECURE 0x80000000 > #define OMAP_TIMER_ALWON 0x40000000 > #define OMAP_TIMER_HAS_PWM 0x20000000 > ... That may break coprocessors where the firmware may expect a hardcoded specific timer.. So at least that should be checked before the change. If the specific timer is still needed for some firmware, it's best to add a separate function for the capabilities. Also, I believe it's up to the firmware running in secure mode to select the secure timers. So unless there's some way to query which timers are claimed by the secure mode, that too needs to be passed via DT. Regards, 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
