From: t-kristo@ti.com (Tero Kristo)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 18:41:26 +0300
Subject: [PATCHv4 03/33] CLK: OMAP4: Add DPLL clock support
In-Reply-To: <51FA7A78.20702@ti.com>
References: <1374564028-11352-1-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com>
 <1374564028-11352-4-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <51FA1C7D.5060403@ti.com>
 <51FA7A78.20702@ti.com>
Message-ID: <51FA81A6.3070105@ti.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 08/01/2013 06:10 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 03:29 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>> Tero,
>>
>> On Tuesday 23 July 2013 12:49 PM, Tero Kristo wrote:
>>> +    dd->control_reg = of_iomap(node, 0);
>>> +    dd->idlest_reg = of_iomap(node, 1);
>>> +    dd->autoidle_reg = of_iomap(node, 2);
>>> +    dd->mult_div1_reg = of_iomap(node, 3);
>>> +
>> []...
>>> +    reg = of_iomap(node, 0);
>>
>> Doing an of_iomap() for every single clock register seems like an
>> overkill
>> and might have performance penalties at boot.
>
> the other option might be to use offset and a single allocation - but I
> think Tero should comment if this is possible or if registers on some
> SoCs are strewn all over the place

Well, currently the basic clock nodes also do their individual 
of_iomaps, so doing a tweak only for the OMAP DPLLs is not going to 
change the figure much.

A generic solution is needed but I think this was commented elsewhere by 
Mike to remain as future optimization (can't find the reference to this 
with a quick search though.)

-Tero