Re: [PATCH] Add COUNTER_FUNCTION_DISABLE to the counter API

[David Lechner]

On 11/27/24 3:54 PM, Rafael V. Volkmer wrote:
> On 11/25/24 11:36 AM, David Lechner wrote:
>> How does this work without an additional patch to modify the TI eQEP
>> counter driver to handle this new enum value? For example, I would
>> expect that this enum value would be added to ti_eqep_position_functions
>> and case statements added in ti_eqep_function_read(),
>> ti_eqep_function_write() and ti_eqep_action_read() to handle the new
>> option.
> 
> Hi, David!
> 
> Yes, the intention is to have a second path where the eQEP driver handles 
> this within these file operations functions.
> 
> Best regards

OK, so please send those patches too so that we can see the whole picture.

Based on your discussion with William, it sounds like there are 2 things
that need to be resolved.

1. Should a power saving mode actually be a counter function or should it
   be controlled by the counter enable attribute or something else, like
   more general Linux power management stuff?
2. If there are going to be in-kernel users calling these functions, then
   we will likely want to introduce some new APIs in the kernel for this.
   Using platform_get_drvdata() from one driver to another is a bit
   fragile. Likely we will want some devicetree bindings for counter
   consumers and providers and some kernel APIs like a counter_get() that
   takes an index or string ID to get the counter provider assigned to a
   counter consumer. Then we will probably want some wrappers around the
   counter ops pointers so that consumer drivers don't have to depend on
   the internal implementation of the counter subsystem.