[PATCH v5 01/14] ARM: OMAP2+: gpmc: platform definitions

[Jon Hunter]

On 06/11/2012 09:26 AM, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
> gpmc driver platform definitions
> 
> Signed-off-by: Afzal Mohammed <afzal at ti.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/gpmc.h |   49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/gpmc.h b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/gpmc.h
> index 802fb22..21a8cce 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/gpmc.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/gpmc.h
> @@ -139,6 +139,55 @@ struct gpmc_timings {
>  	u16 wr_data_mux_bus;	/* WRDATAONADMUXBUS */
>  };
>  
> +/* bool type time settings */
> +struct gpmc_misc_timings {
> +	bool cycle2cyclediffcsen;
> +	bool cycle2cyclesamecsen;
> +	bool we_extra_delay;
> +	bool oe_extra_delay;
> +	bool adv_extra_delay;
> +	bool cs_extra_delay;
> +	bool time_para_granularity;
> +};
> +
> +enum {
> +	has_none,
> +	has_period,
> +	has_clock
> +};
> +
> +struct gpmc_time_ctrl {
> +	int type;
> +	struct gpmc_timings timings;
> +	struct gpmc_misc_timings bool_timings;
> +};

Why not combine misc_timings and the original timings? I don't see why
these need to be kept separate. Even if combined it can still be
backward compatible for legacy boards as they will not specify the misc
timing fields. I am also not convinced we need this type member.

Jon

> +struct gpmc_cs_data {
> +	unsigned		cs;
> +	unsigned long		mem_size;
> +	unsigned long		mem_offset;
> +	bool			have_config;
> +	unsigned		config;
> +	struct gpmc_time_ctrl	time_ctrl;
> +	unsigned		irq_config;
> +};
> +
> +struct gpmc_device_pdata {
> +	char			*name;
> +	int			id;
> +	void			*pdata;
> +	unsigned		pdata_size;
> +	struct resource		*per_res;
> +	unsigned		per_res_cnt;
> +	struct gpmc_cs_data	*cs_data;
> +	unsigned		num_cs;
> +};
> +
> +struct gpmc_pdata {
> +	unsigned			num_device;
> +	struct gpmc_device_pdata	**device_pdata;
> +};
> +
>  struct gpmc_nand_regs {
>  	void __iomem	*gpmc_status;
>  	void __iomem	*gpmc_nand_command;