On 01/17/2013 10:51 AM, Tom Warren wrote:
Stephen,
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 01/16/2013 02:14 PM, Tom Warren wrote:
Common Tegra files are in arch-tegra, shared between T20/T30/T114. Tegra114-specific headers are in arch-tegra114. Note that some of these will be filled in as more T114 support is added (drivers, WB/LP0 support, etc.).
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra114/gpio.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-tegra114/gpio.h
I think the Tegra30 and Tegra114 GPIO controllers are basically identical. Can this file be shared at all?
gpio.h is identical for T30 and T114, but not for T20. I've already commonized what I could in arch-tegra/gpio.h, but to do the same for the gpio_ctlr struct and gpio_pin enums would involve #ifdefs, which is moving in the wrong direction, IMO. If you have a way to share one or two files between T20/T30/T114/future SoCs, I'll give it a try.
This may not work well for U-Boot since it uses structs to define the register layouts rather than simply #defining the various register addresses, but:
We use the exact same driver code for Tegra20/30/114. The difference in register layout between Tegra20/30 can be described algorithmically with the following data:
struct tegra_gpio_soc_config { u32 bank_stride; u32 upper_offset; };
static struct tegra_gpio_soc_config tegra20_gpio_config = { .bank_stride = 0x80, .upper_offset = 0x800, };
static struct tegra_gpio_soc_config tegra30_gpio_config = { .bank_stride = 0x100, .upper_offset = 0x80, };
static struct of_device_id tegra_gpio_of_match[] = { { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-gpio", .data = &tegra30_gpio_config }, { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-gpio", .data = &tegra20_gpio_config }, { }, };
which feeds into a few register offset #defines:
#define GPIO_REG(x) (GPIO_BANK(x) * tegra_gpio_bank_stride + \
...
#define GPIO_CNF(x) (GPIO_REG(x) + 0x00)
...
#define GPIO_MSK_CNF(x) (GPIO_REG(x) + tegra_gpio_upper_offset + 0x00)
Alternatively, can the Tegra114 GPIO header simply #include the Tegra30 GPIO header and do nothing else, via some relative include or similar? I'm not sure how gross that'd turn out to be.