[PATCH v4 02/15] clk: Allow drivers to pass in a regmap
From: Stephen Boyd <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-09 02:11:51
Also in:
linux-arm-msm, lkml
On 01/08/14 17:51, Mike Turquette wrote:
Quoting Stephen Boyd (2013-12-23 17:12:26)quoted
Add support to the clock core so that drivers can pass in a regmap. If no regmap is specified try to query the device that's registering the clock for its regmap. This should allow drivers to use the core regmap helpers. This is based on a similar design in the regulator framework. Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <redacted> --- drivers/clk/clk.c | 8 ++++++++ include/linux/clk-provider.h | 7 +++++++ 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c index 9ad7b71..5e71f5c 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ #include <linux/device.h> #include <linux/init.h> #include <linux/sched.h> +#include <linux/regmap.h> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(enable_lock); static DEFINE_MUTEX(prepare_lock);@@ -1834,6 +1835,13 @@ static int _clk_register(struct device *dev, struct clk_hw *hw, struct clk *clk) clk->num_parents = hw->init->num_parents; hw->clk = clk; + if (hw->init->regmap) + hw->regmap = hw->init->regmap;Hi Stephen, The whole series looks good to me except for the placement of the regmap details inside struct clk_hw. That structure exists only to hide struct clk from the hardware-specific clock structure and I'd not like to set the precedent of shoving per-clock data into it. As an alternative, how about finding a way to put these per-clock regmap details into the hardware-specific clock structure? I understand that you want to make these ops available to others, which is why they are in the public struct clk_hw. I'm just wondering if that is the right way to do it...
The regulator framework has gone this way. It seemed like a similar approach in the clock framework would be the right way to go too.
Patch #3 illustrates the sort of struct-member-creep that worries me. What is to stop someone from putting "unsigned int divider_reg" or "unsigned int mux_reg", and then the thing just keeps growing.
I see two ways forward if you don't want these members in struct clk_hw.
1) Inheritance: struct clk_regmap wrapper struct and
clk_register_regmap() and devm_clk_register_regmap() and then another
wrapper struct around that.
example:
struct clk_regmap {
struct clk_hw hw;
struct regmap *regmap;
unsigned int enable_reg;
unsigned int enable_mask;
bool enable_is_inverted;
};
struct clk_branch {
u32 hwcg_reg;
u32 halt_reg;
u8 hwcg_bit;
u8 halt_bit;
u8 halt_check;
struct clk_regmap clkr;
};
static struct clk_branch gsbi1_uart_clk = {
.halt_reg = 0x2fcc,
.halt_bit = 10,
.clkr = {
.enable_reg = 0x29d4,
.enable_mask = BIT(9),
.hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
.name = "gsbi1_uart_clk",
.parent_names = (const char *[]){
"gsbi1_uart_src",
},
.num_parents = 1,
.ops = &clk_branch_ops,
.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
},
},
};
2) Interfaces: Add a void *data in struct clk_hw that can point to
whatever I want and still have the same clk_regmap_register() and
devm_clk_regmap_register()
Example:
struct clk_hw {
struct clk *clk;
const struct clk_init_data *init;
void *data;
};
struct clk_regmap {
struct regmap *regmap;
unsigned int enable_reg;
unsigned int enable_mask;
bool enable_is_inverted;
};
struct clk_branch {
u32 hwcg_reg;
u32 halt_reg;
u8 hwcg_bit;
u8 halt_bit;
u8 halt_check;
struct clk_hw;
};
static struct clk_branch gsbi1_uart_clk = {
.halt_reg = 0x2fcc,
.halt_bit = 10,
.hw = {
.data = &(struct clk_regmap){
.enable_reg = 0x29d4,
.enable_mask = BIT(9),
};
.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
.name = "gsbi1_uart_clk",
.parent_names = (const char *[]){
"gsbi1_uart_src",
},
.num_parents = 1,
.ops = &clk_branch_ops,
.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
},
},
};
I guess option 2 is less likely given your comment about clk_hw being
nothing more than a traversal mechanism.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation