Re: [PATCH 3/3] omap: add hwspinlock device

[Tony Lindgren]

* Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [101022 09:54]:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:56:13AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@xxxxxxxxxx> [101020 12:12]:
> > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Kevin Hilman
> > > <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >> Let's take the i2c-omap for example.
> > > >>
> > > >> It sounds like it must have a predefined hwspinlock, but what if:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. It will use omap_hwspinlock_request() to dynamically allocate a hwspinlock
> > > >> 2. Obviously, the hwspinlock id number must be communicated to the M3
> > > >> BIOS, so the i2c-omap will publish that id using a small shared memory
> > > >> entry that will be allocated for this sole purpose
> > > >> 3. we will make sure that 1+2 completes before the remote processor is
> > > >> taken out of reset
> > 
> > Guys, let's try to come up with a generic interface for this instead of
> > polluting the device drivers with more omap specific interfaces.
> > 
> > We really want to keep the drivers generic and platform independent.
> > 
> > Sure we still have some omap specific stuff in the drivers, like
> > cpu_is_omapxxxx, and omap specific dma calls, but those will be going
> > away.
> > 
> > Unless somebody has better ideas, I suggest we pass a lock function
> > in the platform_data to the drivers that need it, and do the omap
> > specific nasty stuff in the platform code.
> 
> For those of you going to plumbers, I'll put this on the embedded
> microconference agenda when we're talking about common infrastructure.

Great, thanks.

Tony
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/