On Tue, 02 Sep 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 02 September 2014 09:05:16 Lee Jones wrote: > > On Mon, 01 Sep 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > On Monday 01 September 2014 17:04:26 Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Mon, 01 Sep 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Maybe I'm misreading the patch, but I don't see how it creates a > > > > > migration path. What I want to end up with is infrastructure that > > > > > lets anybody call syscon_regmap_lookup_by_pdevname or > > > > > syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible (if they really need to) > > > > > without needing the platform_driver for syscon. That should not > > > > > require any form of compatibility layer because to the driver > > > > > using it there is no API change. > > > > > > > > Somehow I think the likelyhood is that I am misreading the patch. > > > > > > > > I thought that before this patch drivers we had to register a syscon > > > > device to bind to this driver, which was fine for the first use-cases > > > > of syscon as it wasn't required too early during boot. However, now > > > > there are use-cases where systems require access to syscon registers > > > > eariler in boot we require a means to obtain access prior to device > > > > probing. I thought this patch not only provides that possibilty, but > > > > also leaves in the ability to register direct from DT. > > > > > > Right, it does provide the ability to have syscon before devices > > > are registered, I missed that part. > > > > > > > > In contrast, this patch introduces a new of_syscon_{un,}register() > > > > > interface that would get removed after the the above has > > > > > been implemented, causing extra churn for any driver that also > > > > > wants to provide a regmap-like interface. > > > > > > > > When will we ever not have to register syscon? > > > > > > The idea is that we implicitly register the syscon block when someone > > > calls syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible or syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle > > > and then return a reference to that new syscon. When another driver > > > looks up the same device node, we just pass a reference to the existing > > > syscon. > > > > Doesn't sound too unreasonable. So how about instead of exporting > > these new of_syscon_{un,}register() calls, we make them static and > > call them from syscon_regmap_lookup_by_{phandle,compatible}? > > Yes, that would be a good start. We should think about whether we want > to remove the existing DT probing at the same time, since it becomes > unused, and we might want to move the code to drivers/base/regmap_*.c > at some point I'd support that move - and can even draft the patch if required. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html