On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 3:14 PM Lee Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Apr 2020, Baolin Wang wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:05 PM Lee Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 27 Apr 2020, Baolin Wang wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Arnd and Lee, > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:13 PM Baolin Wang <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Some platforms such as Spreadtrum platform, define a special method to > > > > > update bits of the registers instead of read-modify-write, which means > > > > > we should use a physical regmap bus to define the reg_update_bits() > > > > > operation instead of the MMIO regmap bus. Thus we can register a new > > > > > physical regmap bus into syscon core to support this. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Do you have any comments for this patch? Thanks. > > > > > > Yes. I'm not accepting it, sorry. > > > > > > I'd rather you duplicate the things you need from of_syscon_register() > > > in your own driver than taint this one. > > > > Thanks for your comments and I can understand your concern. But we > > still want to use the standard syscon APIs in syscon.c, which means we > > still need insert an callback or registration or other similar methods > > to support vendor specific regmap bus. Otherwise we should invent some > > similar syscon APIs in our vendor syscon driver, like > > sprd_syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle/sprd_syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible. > > So long as the generic driver stays generic. Providing a registration > function sounds cleaner than tainting the code with vendor specifics.
So seems my V1 patch set [1] was on the direction as you suggested, but Arnd did not like that. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1226161/ https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1226162/ -- Baolin Wang
