Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-09-21 Thread Heiko Stübner 
Hi,

Am Donnerstag, 28. Juli 2016, 21:46:04 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Kever Yang  
wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> > 
> > CC Doug for this topic.
> > 
> > On 07/12/2016 07:54 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> Hi Kever,
> >> 
> >> On 11 July 2016 at 00:58, Kever Yang  wrote:
> >>> Hi Simon,
> >>> 
> >>> On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>  Hi Kever,
>  
>  On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:
> > The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
> > RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
> > MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.
> > 
> > Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477
>  
>  patman will automatically remove these for you.
> >>> 
> >>> Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.
> >>> 
> > Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
> > ---
> > 
> >drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
> >1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> > index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> > @@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
> > 
> >#include 
> >#include 
> >#include 
> > 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
> > 
> >#include 
> >#include 
> > 
> > +#endif
> > 
> >#include 
> >#include 
> > 
> > @@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
> > 
> >struct rk_pwm_priv {
> >
> >   struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
> > 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
> > 
> >   struct rk3288_grf *grf;
> > 
> > +#endif
> > 
> >};
> >
> >static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel,
> >uint
> > 
> > period_ns,
> > @@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct
> > udevice
> > *dev)
> > 
> >   struct regmap *map;
> >   
> >   priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
> > 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
> > 
> >   map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
> >   if (IS_ERR(map))
> >   
> >   return PTR_ERR(map);
> >   
> >   priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
> > 
> > +#endif
>  
>  I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
>  perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
>  code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.
>  
>  Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
>  containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
>  and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.
>  
>  What do you think?
> >>> 
> >>> Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
> >>> grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
> >>> all kinds of system/module control registers .
> >>> Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
> >>> RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
> >>> better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.
> >>> 
> >>> For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c
> >>> is
> >>> needed, because they are not so common for different module and
> >>> different
> >>> Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general
> >>> soc.c
> >>> won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .
> >>> 
> >>> I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can
> >>> leave
> >>> it
> >>> as it is,
> >>> and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.
> >> 
> >> I looked quickly at the Linux pwm driver but I don't see any grf
> >> access there. How does the grf register get set in Linux? I really
> >> want to avoid SoC-specific #ifdefs in drivers.
> > 
> > Doug(in cc list) send the patch for this pwm setting, but it seems does
> > not
> > accept by upstream,
> > I think people also don't like this grf access in driver and prefer this
> > kind of one time init operation
> > to be done in bootloader.
> > patchset 1 implement in arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rockchip.c
> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280064.h
> > tml patchset 4 implement in drivers/pwm_rockchip.c
> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280715.h
> > tml
> > 
> > Hi Doug,
> > 
> > Do you have any suggestion here?
> 
> Heiko will skin me for suggesting it, but one option would be to
> consider this as a pinmux thing in the linux kernel.  The GRF can
> choose between two IP blocks internally: the old PWM IP block or the
>

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-28 Thread Doug Anderson 
Hi,

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Kever Yang  wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> CC Doug for this topic.
>
>
> On 07/12/2016 07:54 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kever,
>>
>> On 11 July 2016 at 00:58, Kever Yang  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
>>> On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

 Hi Kever,

 On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:
>
> The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
> RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
> MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.
>
> Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

 patman will automatically remove these for you.
>>>
>>> Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.
>>>
> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
> ---
>drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
>1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> @@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
>#include 
>#include 
>#include 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>#include 
>#include 
> +#endif
>#include 
>#include 
>
> @@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>
>struct rk_pwm_priv {
>   struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>   struct rk3288_grf *grf;
> +#endif
>};
>
>static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint
> period_ns,
> @@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice
> *dev)
>   struct regmap *map;
>
>   priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>   map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
>   if (IS_ERR(map))
>   return PTR_ERR(map);
>   priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
> +#endif

 I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
 perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
 code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.

 Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
 containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
 and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.

 What do you think?
>>>
>>> Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
>>> grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
>>> all kinds of system/module control registers .
>>> Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
>>> RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
>>> better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.
>>>
>>> For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c
>>> is
>>> needed, because they are not so common for different module and different
>>> Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general soc.c
>>> won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .
>>>
>>> I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can leave
>>> it
>>> as it is,
>>> and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.
>>
>> I looked quickly at the Linux pwm driver but I don't see any grf
>> access there. How does the grf register get set in Linux? I really
>> want to avoid SoC-specific #ifdefs in drivers.
>
> Doug(in cc list) send the patch for this pwm setting, but it seems does not
> accept by upstream,
> I think people also don't like this grf access in driver and prefer this
> kind of one time init operation
> to be done in bootloader.
> patchset 1 implement in arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rockchip.c
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280064.html
> patchset 4 implement in drivers/pwm_rockchip.c
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280715.html
>
> Hi Doug,
> Do you have any suggestion here?

Heiko will skin me for suggesting it, but one option would be to
consider this as a pinmux thing in the linux kernel.  The GRF can
choose between two IP blocks internally: the old PWM IP block or the
new PWM IP block.  ;)

I believe the other option is to handle atop Heiko's patches:

9131959 New  [1/3] dt-bindings: add used but undocumented
rockchip grf compatible values
9131963 New  [2/3] soc: rockchip: add driver handling grf setup
9131957 New  [3/3] ARM: rockchip: drop rk3288 jtag/mmc switch handling

I believe Heiko's patches implement the "grf subclass" talked about in
.

-Doug
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-28 Thread Kever Yang 

Hi Simon,

On 07/12/2016 09:12 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Kever,

On 11 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:

Hi Simon,

CC Doug for this topic.


On 07/12/2016 07:54 AM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Kever,

On 11 July 2016 at 00:58, Kever Yang  wrote:

Hi Simon,

On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Kever,

On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:

The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.

Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

patman will automatically remove these for you.

Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.


Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
---
drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
@@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
#include 
#include 
#include 
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
#include 
#include 
+#endif
#include 
#include 

@@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;

struct rk_pwm_priv {
   struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
   struct rk3288_grf *grf;
+#endif
};

static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint
period_ns,
@@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice
*dev)
   struct regmap *map;

   priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
   map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
   if (IS_ERR(map))
   return PTR_ERR(map);
   priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
+#endif

I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.

Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.

What do you think?

Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
all kinds of system/module control registers .
Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.

For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c
is
needed, because they are not so common for different module and different
Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general soc.c
won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .


Which entry for soc init in general soc.c is reasonable? I prefer as 
early as possible,
because I want to do the clock init at the same place, how about 
board_early_init_f()

or arch_cpu_init()?



I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can leave
it
as it is,
and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.

I looked quickly at the Linux pwm driver but I don't see any grf
access there. How does the grf register get set in Linux? I really
want to avoid SoC-specific #ifdefs in drivers.

Doug(in cc list) send the patch for this pwm setting, but it seems does not
accept by upstream,
I think people also don't like this grf access in driver and prefer this
kind of one time init operation
to be done in bootloader.
patchset 1 implement in arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rockchip.c
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280064.html
patchset 4 implement in drivers/pwm_rockchip.c
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280715.html

Hi Doug,
 Do you have any suggestion here?

I think the device_is_compatible() idea would work OK for U-Boot if
you want to do that. It's the CONFIG I want to avoid in the driver.


The compatible in rk3399.dtsi for pwm is:
compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-pwm", "rockchip,rk3288-pwm";

So I would like to consider this setting as a SoC general setting in a 
SoC file,
instead of setting in pwm driver, because there might be other setting 
for other

module need us to fix in soc.c.

Thanks,
- Kever


Regards,
Simon






___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-12 Thread Simon Glass 
Hi Kever,

On 11 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> CC Doug for this topic.
>
>
> On 07/12/2016 07:54 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kever,
>>
>> On 11 July 2016 at 00:58, Kever Yang  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Simon,
>>>
>>> On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

 Hi Kever,

 On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:
>
> The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
> RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
> MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.
>
> Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

 patman will automatically remove these for you.
>>>
>>> Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.
>>>
> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
> ---
>drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
>1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> @@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
>#include 
>#include 
>#include 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>#include 
>#include 
> +#endif
>#include 
>#include 
>
> @@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>
>struct rk_pwm_priv {
>   struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>   struct rk3288_grf *grf;
> +#endif
>};
>
>static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint
> period_ns,
> @@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice
> *dev)
>   struct regmap *map;
>
>   priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>   map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
>   if (IS_ERR(map))
>   return PTR_ERR(map);
>   priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
> +#endif

 I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
 perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
 code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.

 Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
 containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
 and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.

 What do you think?
>>>
>>> Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
>>> grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
>>> all kinds of system/module control registers .
>>> Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
>>> RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
>>> better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.
>>>
>>> For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c
>>> is
>>> needed, because they are not so common for different module and different
>>> Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general soc.c
>>> won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .
>>>
>>> I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can leave
>>> it
>>> as it is,
>>> and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.
>>
>> I looked quickly at the Linux pwm driver but I don't see any grf
>> access there. How does the grf register get set in Linux? I really
>> want to avoid SoC-specific #ifdefs in drivers.
>
> Doug(in cc list) send the patch for this pwm setting, but it seems does not
> accept by upstream,
> I think people also don't like this grf access in driver and prefer this
> kind of one time init operation
> to be done in bootloader.
> patchset 1 implement in arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rockchip.c
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280064.html
> patchset 4 implement in drivers/pwm_rockchip.c
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280715.html
>
> Hi Doug,
> Do you have any suggestion here?

I think the device_is_compatible() idea would work OK for U-Boot if
you want to do that. It's the CONFIG I want to avoid in the driver.

Regards,
Simon
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-11 Thread Kever Yang 

Hi Simon,

CC Doug for this topic.

On 07/12/2016 07:54 AM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Kever,

On 11 July 2016 at 00:58, Kever Yang  wrote:

Hi Simon,

On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Kever,

On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:

The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.

Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

patman will automatically remove these for you.

Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.


Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
---
   drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
@@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
   #include 
   #include 
   #include 
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
   #include 
   #include 
+#endif
   #include 
   #include 

@@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;

   struct rk_pwm_priv {
  struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
  struct rk3288_grf *grf;
+#endif
   };

   static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint
period_ns,
@@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice
*dev)
  struct regmap *map;

  priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
  map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
  if (IS_ERR(map))
  return PTR_ERR(map);
  priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
+#endif

I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.

Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.

What do you think?

Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
all kinds of system/module control registers .
Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.

For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c is
needed, because they are not so common for different module and different
Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general soc.c
won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .

I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can leave it
as it is,
and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.

I looked quickly at the Linux pwm driver but I don't see any grf
access there. How does the grf register get set in Linux? I really
want to avoid SoC-specific #ifdefs in drivers.
Doug(in cc list) send the patch for this pwm setting, but it seems does 
not accept by upstream,
I think people also don't like this grf access in driver and prefer this 
kind of one time init operation

to be done in bootloader.
patchset 1 implement in arch/arm/mach-rockchip/rockchip.c
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280064.html
patchset 4 implement in drivers/pwm_rockchip.c
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280715.html

Hi Doug,
Do you have any suggestion here?

Thanks,
- Kever



Thanks,
- Kever


  return 0;
   }

   static int rk_pwm_probe(struct udevice *dev)
   {
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
  struct rk_pwm_priv *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);

  rk_setreg(>grf->soc_con2, 1 << 0);
+#endif

  return 0;
   }
--
1.9.1



Regards,
Simon






Regards,
Simon






___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-11 Thread Simon Glass 
Hi Kever,

On 11 July 2016 at 00:58, Kever Yang  wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kever,
>>
>> On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:
>>>
>>> The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
>>> RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
>>> MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.
>>>
>>> Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477
>>
>> patman will automatically remove these for you.
>
> Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.
>
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
>>>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
>>> index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
>>> @@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
>>>   #include 
>>>   #include 
>>>   #include 
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>>>   #include 
>>>   #include 
>>> +#endif
>>>   #include 
>>>   #include 
>>>
>>> @@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>>>
>>>   struct rk_pwm_priv {
>>>  struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>>>  struct rk3288_grf *grf;
>>> +#endif
>>>   };
>>>
>>>   static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint
>>> period_ns,
>>> @@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice
>>> *dev)
>>>  struct regmap *map;
>>>
>>>  priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>>>  map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
>>>  if (IS_ERR(map))
>>>  return PTR_ERR(map);
>>>  priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
>>> +#endif
>>
>> I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
>> perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
>> code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.
>>
>> Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
>> containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
>> and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
> grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
> all kinds of system/module control registers .
> Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
> RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
> better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.
>
> For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c is
> needed, because they are not so common for different module and different
> Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general soc.c
> won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .
>
> I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can leave it
> as it is,
> and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.

I looked quickly at the Linux pwm driver but I don't see any grf
access there. How does the grf register get set in Linux? I really
want to avoid SoC-specific #ifdefs in drivers.

>
> Thanks,
> - Kever
>
>>
>>>  return 0;
>>>   }
>>>
>>>   static int rk_pwm_probe(struct udevice *dev)
>>>   {
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>>>  struct rk_pwm_priv *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);
>>>
>>>  rk_setreg(>grf->soc_con2, 1 << 0);
>>> +#endif
>>>
>>>  return 0;
>>>   }
>>> --
>>> 1.9.1
>>>
>>>
>> Regards,
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Regards,
Simon
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-11 Thread Kever Yang 

Hi Simon,

On 07/09/2016 10:39 PM, Simon Glass wrote:

Hi Kever,

On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:

The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.

Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

patman will automatically remove these for you.

Will use patman for my new patches later, thanks.



Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
---
  drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
@@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
  #include 
  #include 
+#endif
  #include 
  #include 

@@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;

  struct rk_pwm_priv {
 struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
 struct rk3288_grf *grf;
+#endif
  };

  static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint 
period_ns,
@@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice *dev)
 struct regmap *map;

 priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
 map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
 if (IS_ERR(map))
 return PTR_ERR(map);
 priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
+#endif

I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.

Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.

What do you think?

Every Rockchip soc have grf, and maybe sgrf, pmugrf which much like
grf. The content in grf are very different for different SoC, it gathers
all kinds of system/module control registers .
Back to the grf setting for pwm, this control operation is only need in
RK3288, not in RK3399 and new SoC further. so I think the '#ifdef' is
better to stay in driver file like rk_pwm.c.

For these system control registers, I'm sure the dedicate general soc.c is
needed, because they are not so common for different module and different
Soc. We are not able to have a common framework for them, a general soc.c
won't help much except all the system control are gather in one file .

I think the GRF setting is part of the module and driver, so we can 
leave it as it is,

and a simple syscon driver is enough for grf like what is kernel do.

Thanks,
- Kever



 return 0;
  }

  static int rk_pwm_probe(struct udevice *dev)
  {
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
 struct rk_pwm_priv *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);

 rk_setreg(>grf->soc_con2, 1 << 0);
+#endif

 return 0;
  }
--
1.9.1



Regards,
Simon






___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-09 Thread Simon Glass 
Hi Kever,

On 7 July 2016 at 20:45, Kever Yang  wrote:
> The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
> RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
> MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.
>
> Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

patman will automatically remove these for you.

> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
> @@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
>  #include 
>  #include 
>  #include 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
>  #include 
>  #include 
> +#endif
>  #include 
>  #include 
>
> @@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
>
>  struct rk_pwm_priv {
> struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
> struct rk3288_grf *grf;
> +#endif
>  };
>
>  static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint 
> period_ns,
> @@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice *dev)
> struct regmap *map;
>
> priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
> map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
> if (IS_ERR(map))
> return PTR_ERR(map);
> priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
> +#endif

I'd like to find a better way. Do all chips have a grf? If so then
perhaps we can have a function like grf_enable_pwm() in the core SoC
code and call it here. The #ifdef can be there.

Or perhaps we should have a general soc.c, with its own struct
containing pointers to grf, sgrf, etc. It can be set up at the start,
and then provide a soc_enable_pwm() function to enable the pwm.

What do you think?

>
> return 0;
>  }
>
>  static int rk_pwm_probe(struct udevice *dev)
>  {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
> struct rk_pwm_priv *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);
>
> rk_setreg(>grf->soc_con2, 1 << 0);
> +#endif
>
> return 0;
>  }
> --
> 1.9.1
>
>

Regards,
Simon
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] pwm: add MACRO to limit some code which only for rk3288

2016-07-07 Thread Ziyuan Xu 



On 2016年07月08日 10:45, Kever Yang wrote:

The grf setting for rkpwm is only need in rk3288, other SoCs like
RK3399 which also use rkpwm do not need set the grf, let's add a
MACRO to make the code only for RK3288.

Change-Id: I167a4e8cf925e840d4bbbcfb1437aaed52b81477

Superfluous Change-Id.

Signed-off-by: Kever Yang 
---
  drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c | 8 
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
index 2d289a4..e34adf0 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/rk_pwm.c
@@ -13,8 +13,10 @@
  #include 
  #include 
  #include 
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
  #include 
  #include 
+#endif
  #include 
  #include 
  
@@ -22,7 +24,9 @@ DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
  
  struct rk_pwm_priv {

struct rk3288_pwm *regs;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
struct rk3288_grf *grf;
+#endif
  };
  
  static int rk_pwm_set_config(struct udevice *dev, uint channel, uint period_ns,

@@ -65,19 +69,23 @@ static int rk_pwm_ofdata_to_platdata(struct udevice *dev)
struct regmap *map;
  
  	priv->regs = (struct rk3288_pwm *)dev_get_addr(dev);

+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
map = syscon_get_regmap_by_driver_data(ROCKCHIP_SYSCON_GRF);
if (IS_ERR(map))
return PTR_ERR(map);
priv->grf = regmap_get_range(map, 0);
+#endif
  
  	return 0;

  }
  
  static int rk_pwm_probe(struct udevice *dev)

  {
+#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
struct rk_pwm_priv *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);
  
  	rk_setreg(>grf->soc_con2, 1 << 0);

+#endif
  
  	return 0;

  }



___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot