Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1361964 > unrolled thread

Re: [RESEND RFC 3/3] nvmem: Add 'nvmem-composite' driver

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [RESEND RFC 3/3] nvmem: Add 'nvmem-composite' driver Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 17:20 +0100
    Re: [RESEND RFC 3/3] nvmem: Add 'nvmem-composite' driver Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> - 2016-03-21 18:00 +0100

#1361964 — Re: [RESEND RFC 3/3] nvmem: Add 'nvmem-composite' driver

>> a-node {
>>           nvmem-cells = <&cell_a &cell_b>, ????;
>>           nvmem-cell-names = "some-data", "more-data";
>> };
>>
> Should have replied you long back :-)

No worries :-)

>>
>> and I want "more-data" to reference only one phandle, how would this be
>> handled?
>>
> yes this would fail.
>
> The device tree compiler would concatenate all the cells and we have no
> means to know where did "more-data" starts.
>
> sounds like composite driver is the way forward.

What's your preference on "separate driver" vs. "part of the NVMEM
framework"? Should I keep it as a separate driver or try to fold it
into NVMEM core?

Thanks,
Andrey

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1361994

On 21/03/16 16:12, Andrey Smirnov wrote:
>>> a-node {
>>>            nvmem-cells = <&cell_a &cell_b>, ????;
>>>            nvmem-cell-names = "some-data", "more-data";
>>> };
>>>
>> Should have replied you long back :-)
>
> No worries :-)
>
>>>
>>> and I want "more-data" to reference only one phandle, how would this be
>>> handled?
>>>
>> yes this would fail.
>>
>> The device tree compiler would concatenate all the cells and we have no
>> means to know where did "more-data" starts.
>>
>> sounds like composite driver is the way forward.
>
> What's your preference on "separate driver" vs. "part of the NVMEM
> framework"? Should I keep it as a separate driver or try to fold it
> into NVMEM core?

It does not make sense to have this driver as a separate nvmem provider, 
can you fold it in the nvmem core itself for now.


Thanks,
srini
>
> Thanks,
> Andrey
>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web