RE: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Pavel Fedin]

 Hello!

> can we add the "depends on ... && PM" now, later, once
> you'll extend it, you remove it again?

 Yes, you can. However, i think i'll post my patches as soon as the code gets 
integrated into some repository, before it even goes
to the RC. So, it's up to you.

Kind regards,
Pavel Fedin
Expert Engineer
Samsung Electronics Research center Russia


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 20.10.2015 17:17, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>  Hello!
> 
>>>  Pin controller is needed in order to configure multi-functional pins 
>>> correctly.
>>
>> Are there any obstacles for upstreaming it?
> 
>  I don't know. The last post on this topic is from March, 2015:
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-March/330862.html. 
> Patch 0003 has been acked-by, and nothing more since
> that.
>  Actually, only 0002 and 0003 of this series are needed for the pin 
> controller. 0001 has been accepted
> (27284129522e7e2a5b89e80bd44ea3345f79c9e8).

I see that all objections were solved and I already reviewed all of the
patches. This was sent before I started collecting patches as
co-maintainer so all it is needed now is to rebase and resend with
collected tags.

I'll try to find them in my archives and apply.

Really, if you have anything waiting then just resend/ping. Things
changed since May this year :) .

Best regards,
Krzysztof

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Pavel Fedin]

 Hello!

> AFAIR Fedin was talking about missing functionality, not about adding
> the contribution by himself. So he might add it or he might not. I did
> not receive any commitments from him.

 I am waiting for the driver to be integrated, because i see it's constantly 
redesigned. Then i'll post my patches. By the way, they
will be useful only if pin controller driver for 5410 is accepted upstream, 
several authors have done it but i still didn't see it
in upstream.
 Pin controller is needed in order to configure multi-functional pins correctly.

> The driver should be "proper" for
> the time being (which could mean !PM dependency). If there is a need,
> then the dependency will be removed.

 I can do it later if you prefer.

Kind regards,
Pavel Fedin
Expert Engineer
Samsung Electronics Research center Russia


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 20.10.2015 15:33, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>  Hello!
> 
>> AFAIR Fedin was talking about missing functionality, not about adding
>> the contribution by himself. So he might add it or he might not. I did
>> not receive any commitments from him.
> 
>  I am waiting for the driver to be integrated, because i see it's constantly 
> redesigned. Then i'll post my patches.

That means you will extend the driver? Great! So from my point of view
it is fine.

Dear Pankaj,

With the fix of unneeded NULL assignments:

Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski 


> By the way, they
> will be useful only if pin controller driver for 5410 is accepted upstream, 
> several authors have done it but i still didn't see it
> in upstream.
>  Pin controller is needed in order to configure multi-functional pins 
> correctly.

Are there any obstacles for upstreaming it?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Pavel Fedin]

 Hello!

> >  Pin controller is needed in order to configure multi-functional pins 
> > correctly.
> 
> Are there any obstacles for upstreaming it?

 I don't know. The last post on this topic is from March, 2015:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-March/330862.html. 
Patch 0003 has been acked-by, and nothing more since
that.
 Actually, only 0002 and 0003 of this series are needed for the pin controller. 
0001 has been accepted
(27284129522e7e2a5b89e80bd44ea3345f79c9e8).

Kind regards,
Pavel Fedin
Expert Engineer
Samsung Electronics Research center Russia


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Pankaj Dubey]

On Tuesday 20 October 2015 12:18 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 20.10.2015 15:33, Pavel Fedin wrote:

  Hello!


AFAIR Fedin was talking about missing functionality, not about adding
the contribution by himself. So he might add it or he might not. I did
not receive any commitments from him.


  I am waiting for the driver to be integrated, because i see it's constantly 
redesigned. Then i'll post my patches.


That means you will extend the driver? Great! So from my point of view
it is fine.

Dear Pankaj,

With the fix of unneeded NULL assignments:

Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski 



Thanks. Will update v5 soon with suggested modification.

Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey



By the way, they
will be useful only if pin controller driver for 5410 is accepted upstream, 
several authors have done it but i still didn't see it
in upstream.
  Pin controller is needed in order to configure multi-functional pins 
correctly.


Are there any obstacles for upstreaming it?

Best regards,
Krzysztof



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Pavel,

> > AFAIR Fedin was talking about missing functionality, not about adding
> > the contribution by himself. So he might add it or he might not. I did
> > not receive any commitments from him.
> 
>  I am waiting for the driver to be integrated, because i see it's constantly 
> redesigned. Then i'll post my patches. By the way, they
> will be useful only if pin controller driver for 5410 is accepted upstream, 
> several authors have done it but i still didn't see it
> in upstream.
>  Pin controller is needed in order to configure multi-functional pins 
> correctly.
> 
> > The driver should be "proper" for
> > the time being (which could mean !PM dependency). If there is a need,
> > then the dependency will be removed.
> 
>  I can do it later if you prefer.

can we add the "depends on ... && PM" now, later, once
you'll extend it, you remove it again?

Personally I'd prefer this way rather than having a driver that 
does nothing in case of !PM.

Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19.10.2015 20:46, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> This patch adds Exynos SROM controller driver which will handle
> save restore of SROM registers during S2R.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey 
> ---
>  drivers/soc/Kconfig   |   1 +
>  drivers/soc/Makefile  |   1 +
>  drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig   |  13 +++
>  drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile  |   1 +
>  drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c | 179 
> ++
>  drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h |  51 +++
>  6 files changed, 246 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
>  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile
>  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c
>  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
> index 96ddecb..69107c9 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers"
>  
>  source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig"
>  source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig"
> +source "drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig"
>  source "drivers/soc/sunxi/Kconfig"
>  source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig"
>  source "drivers/soc/versatile/Kconfig"
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile
> index 0b12d77..a623616 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_DOVE)  += dove/
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK)  += mediatek/
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)  += qcom/
> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMSUNG)+= samsung/
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sunxi/
>  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/
>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_TI) += ti/
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..ea4bc2a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
> +#
> +# SAMSUNG SoC drivers
> +#
> +menu "Samsung SOC driver support"
> +
> +config SOC_SAMSUNG
> + bool
> +
> +config EXYNOS_SROM
> + bool
> + depends on ARM && ARCH_EXYNOS

When !PM then the driver will... do nothing, right? So maybe make it
depending on PM so tiny configs would benefit?


> +
> +endmenu
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile b/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..9c554d5
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile
> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> +obj-$(CONFIG_EXYNOS_SROM)+= exynos-srom.o
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c 
> b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..e89d455
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,179 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2015 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
> + * http://www.samsung.com/
> + *
> + * EXYNOS - SROM Controller support
> + * Author: Pankaj Dubey 
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + */
> +
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +#include 
> +
> +#include "exynos-srom.h"
> +
> +static const unsigned long exynos_srom_offsets[] = {
> + /* SROM side */
> + EXYNOS_SROM_BW,
> + EXYNOS_SROM_BC0,
> + EXYNOS_SROM_BC1,
> + EXYNOS_SROM_BC2,
> + EXYNOS_SROM_BC3,
> +};
> +
> +/**
> + * struct exynos_srom_reg_dump: register dump of SROM Controller registers.
> + * @offset: srom register offset from the controller base address.
> + * @value: the value of register under the offset.
> + */
> +struct exynos_srom_reg_dump {
> + u32 offset;
> + u32 value;
> +};
> +
> +/**
> + * struct exynos_srom: platform data for exynos srom controller driver.
> + * @dev: platform device pointer
> + * @reg_base: srom base address
> + * @reg_offset: exynos_srom_reg_dump pointer to hold offset and its value.
> + */
> +struct exynos_srom {
> + struct device *dev;
> + void __iomem *reg_base;
> + struct exynos_srom_reg_dump *reg_offset;
> +};
> +
> +static struct exynos_srom_reg_dump *exynos_srom_alloc_reg_dump(
> + const unsigned long *rdump,
> + unsigned long nr_rdump)
> +{
> + struct exynos_srom_reg_dump *rd;
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> + rd = kcalloc(nr_rdump, sizeof(*rd), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!rd)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_rdump; ++i)
> + rd[i].offset = rdump[i];
> +
> + return rd;
> +}
> +
> +static int exynos_srom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np;
> + struct exynos_srom *srom;
> + struct device *dev = >dev;
> +
> + np = dev->of_node;
> + if (!np) {
> + dev_err(>dev, "could not find device info\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + srom = devm_kzalloc(>dev,
> + sizeof(struct exynos_srom), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if 

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Pankaj Dubey]

Hi Krzysztof,

On Tuesday 20 October 2015 05:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 19.10.2015 20:46, Pankaj Dubey wrote:

This patch adds Exynos SROM controller driver which will handle
save restore of SROM registers during S2R.

Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey 
---
  drivers/soc/Kconfig   |   1 +
  drivers/soc/Makefile  |   1 +
  drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig   |  13 +++
  drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile  |   1 +
  drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c | 179 ++
  drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h |  51 +++
  6 files changed, 246 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile
  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c
  create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h

diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
index 96ddecb..69107c9 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers"

  source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig"
  source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig"
+source "drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig"
  source "drivers/soc/sunxi/Kconfig"
  source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig"
  source "drivers/soc/versatile/Kconfig"
diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile
index 0b12d77..a623616 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
  obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_DOVE)   += dove/
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK)   += mediatek/
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += qcom/
+obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMSUNG)  += samsung/
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI)  += sunxi/
  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA)  += tegra/
  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_TI)  += ti/
diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
new file mode 100644
index 000..ea4bc2a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+#
+# SAMSUNG SoC drivers
+#
+menu "Samsung SOC driver support"
+
+config SOC_SAMSUNG
+   bool
+
+config EXYNOS_SROM
+   bool
+   depends on ARM && ARCH_EXYNOS


When !PM then the driver will... do nothing, right? So maybe make it
depending on PM so tiny configs would benefit?



Yes. Currently driver will do nothing if !PM. But as we know Fedin, has 
a plan to extend this driver for auxiliary H/W IP hooked to SROM. So in 
that case this dependency will not be valid as those functionality may 
not be dependent on PM, and we may need to remove it later. So I feel 
better not to add it at first place itself.




+static int exynos_srom_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+   struct exynos_srom *srom = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+
+   kfree(srom->reg_offset);
+   iounmap(srom->reg_base);
+   srom->reg_base = NULL;
+   srom->reg_offset = NULL;


There is no need anymore for these two NULL-s. It made sense only in
previous code when these were global variables. At this point the device
callbacks cannot be accessed so NULL-ifying does not change anything.



Agreed. Will update.


Rest from my point of view looks good.



Thanks for review.

Pankaj


Best regards,
Krzysztof



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] drivers: soc: add support for exynos SROM driver

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 20.10.2015 12:46, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Tuesday 20 October 2015 05:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 19.10.2015 20:46, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
>>> This patch adds Exynos SROM controller driver which will handle
>>> save restore of SROM registers during S2R.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey 
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/soc/Kconfig   |   1 +
>>>   drivers/soc/Makefile  |   1 +
>>>   drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig   |  13 +++
>>>   drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile  |   1 +
>>>   drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c | 179
>>> ++
>>>   drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h |  51 +++
>>>   6 files changed, 246 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/Makefile
>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.c
>>>   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-srom.h
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
>>> index 96ddecb..69107c9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
>>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers"
>>>
>>>   source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig"
>>>   source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig"
>>> +source "drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig"
>>>   source "drivers/soc/sunxi/Kconfig"
>>>   source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig"
>>>   source "drivers/soc/versatile/Kconfig"
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile
>>> index 0b12d77..a623616 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/Makefile
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile
>>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>>>   obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_DOVE)+= dove/
>>>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK)+= mediatek/
>>>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)+= qcom/
>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMSUNG)+= samsung/
>>>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI)+= sunxi/
>>>   obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA)+= tegra/
>>>   obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_TI)+= ti/
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000..ea4bc2a
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/Kconfig
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
>>> +#
>>> +# SAMSUNG SoC drivers
>>> +#
>>> +menu "Samsung SOC driver support"
>>> +
>>> +config SOC_SAMSUNG
>>> +bool
>>> +
>>> +config EXYNOS_SROM
>>> +bool
>>> +depends on ARM && ARCH_EXYNOS
>>
>> When !PM then the driver will... do nothing, right? So maybe make it
>> depending on PM so tiny configs would benefit?
>>
> 
> Yes. Currently driver will do nothing if !PM. But as we know Fedin, has
> a plan to extend this driver for auxiliary H/W IP hooked to SROM. So in
> that case this dependency will not be valid as those functionality may
> not be dependent on PM, and we may need to remove it later. So I feel
> better not to add it at first place itself.

AFAIR Fedin was talking about missing functionality, not about adding
the contribution by himself. So he might add it or he might not. I did
not receive any commitments from him. The driver should be "proper" for
the time being (which could mean !PM dependency). If there is a need,
then the dependency will be removed.

> 
>>> +static int exynos_srom_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +struct exynos_srom *srom = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>> +
>>> +kfree(srom->reg_offset);
>>> +iounmap(srom->reg_base);
>>> +srom->reg_base = NULL;
>>> +srom->reg_offset = NULL;
>>
>> There is no need anymore for these two NULL-s. It made sense only in
>> previous code when these were global variables. At this point the device
>> callbacks cannot be accessed so NULL-ifying does not change anything.
>>
> 
> Agreed. Will update.
> 

Thanks,
Krzysztof

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html