[PATCH 0/4] Introducing Exynos ChipId driver
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
Date: 2014-05-03 15:03:18
Also in:
linux-samsung-soc, lkml
On Saturday 03 May 2014 15:11:36 Pankaj Dubey wrote:
This patch series attempts to get rid of soc_is_exynosXXXX macros and eventually with the help of this series we can probably get rid of CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOSXXXX in near future. Each Exynos SoC has ChipID block which can give information about SoC's product Id and revision number. Currently we have single DT binding information for this as "samsung,exynos4210-chipid". But Exynos4 and Exynos5 SoC series have one small difference in chip Id, with resepect to product id bit-masks. So it means we should have separate compatible string for these different series of SoCs. So I have created new binding information for handling this difference. Also currently I can think of putting this driver code under "drivers/misc/" but suggestions are welcome. Also current form of driver is missing platfrom driver and needs init function to be called from machine file (either exynos.c or platsmp.c). I hope lot of suggestions and comments to improve this further. This patch series is based on Kukjin Kim's for-next (3.14_rc1 tag) and prepared on top of following patch series and it's dependent patch series.
I think putting it into drivers/soc would be most appropriate.
We already have a few drivers lined up that we want in there,
although the directory currently doesn't exist.
However, I would ask that you use the infrastructure provided by
drivers/base/soc.c when you add this driver, to also make the
information available to user space using a standard API.
Ideally this should be done by slightly restructuring the DT
source to make all on-chip devices appear below the soc node.
We'd have to think a bit about how to best do this while
preserving compatibility with existing dts files.
Regarding patch 4, this is not what I meant when I asked for
removing the soc_is_exynos* macros. You basically do a 1:1 replacement
using a different interface, but you still have code that does
things differently based on a global identification.
The only user left in device drivers is now the cpufreq driver,
which is going to be replaced anyway, so that is ok. Having
a global variable that is accessible to random device drivers
is probably not a good idea though, it will just lead to
bad coding in drivers again.
To give an example of how I think it should really be restructured,
let's look at one function:
static const struct exynos_wkup_irq exynos4_wkup_irq[] = {
{ 76, BIT(1) }, /* RTC alarm */
{ 77, BIT(2) }, /* RTC tick */
{ /* sentinel */ },
};
static const struct exynos_wkup_irq exynos5250_wkup_irq[] = {
{ 75, BIT(1) }, /* RTC alarm */
{ 76, BIT(2) }, /* RTC tick */
{ /* sentinel */ },
};
static int exynos_irq_set_wake(struct irq_data *data, unsigned int state)
{
const struct exynos_wkup_irq *wkup_irq;
if (soc_is_exynos5250())
wkup_irq = exynos5250_wkup_irq;
else
wkup_irq = exynos4_wkup_irq;
...
}
There are multiple problems with this code:
- As mentioned, you depend on a specific SoC identification for
something that could be done completely generic.
- The knowledge about what is a wakeup source or not doesn't
really belong here. We don't have a DT binding for wakeups
as far as I'm aware of, but this should probably be handled
locally in the RTC device node, possibly in the node that
contains the S5P_WAKEUP_MASK register.
Arnd