Hi,

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 02:57:03PM +0200, Cousson, Benoit wrote:

Hi Nishanth,

On 7/28/2011 7:53 AM, Menon, Nishanth wrote:

quoted

On 11:57-20110722, Felipe Balbi wrote:
[...]

quoted

quoted

 	/* 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@ti.com>
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@ti.com>
---
 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.

that's a good question, I only suggested the above given the fact that
we already have four functions to grab four different devices. It was
only a way to combine all of those with a simple argument.

-- 
balbi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110728/3cec6a79/attachment.sig>