Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934461AbaJ2RNG (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:13:06 -0400
Received: from mailapp01.imgtec.com ([195.59.15.196]:38333 "EHLO
	mailapp01.imgtec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S933943AbaJ2RNE (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:13:04 -0400
Message-ID: <5451201C.9090106@imgtec.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:13:00 +0000
From: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@chromium.org>
CC: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        "Ian Campbell" <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org>, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@gmail.com>,
        Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@imgtec.com>,
        Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Paul <Paul.Burton@imgtec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] of: Add binding document for MIPS GIC
References: <1414541562-10076-1-git-send-email-abrestic@chromium.org>	<1414541562-10076-3-git-send-email-abrestic@chromium.org>	<5450B1B1.5070301@imgtec.com> <CAL1qeaFeoKFbea7eiiXaw87PYUWO1JmP5xxdLLpW2RrFCprtZg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL1qeaFeoKFbea7eiiXaw87PYUWO1JmP5xxdLLpW2RrFCprtZg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.154.101]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 29/10/14 16:55, Andrew Bresticker wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:21 AM, James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com> wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> On 29/10/14 00:12, Andrew Bresticker wrote:
>>>  - changed compatible string to include CPU version
>>
>>> +Required properties:
>>> +- compatible : Should be "mti,<cpu>-gic".  Supported variants:
>>> +  - "mti,interaptiv-gic"
>>
>>> +Required properties for timer sub-node:
>>> +- compatible : Should be "mti,<cpu>-gic-timer".  Supported variants:
>>> +  - "mti,interaptiv-gic-timer"
>>
>> Erm, I'm a bit confused...
>> Why do you include the core name in the compatible string?
>>
>> You seem to be suggesting that:
>>
>> 1) The GIC/timer drivers need to know what core they're running on.
>>
>> Is that really true?
> 
> They don't now, but it's possible that a future CPU has a newer
> revision of the GIC which has some differences that need to be
> accounted for in the driver.
> 
>> 2) It isn't possible to probe the core type.
>>
>> But the kernel already knows this, so what's wrong with using
>> current_cpu_type() like everything else that needs to know?
>>
>> 3) Every new core should require a new compatible string to be added
>> before the GIC will work. You don't even have a generic compatible
>> string that DT can specify after the core specific one as a fallback.
> 
> Yes, adding a generic compatible string would be a good idea.
> 
>> Please lets not do this unless it's actually necessary (which AFAICT it
>> really isn't).
> 
> The point of this was to future-proof these bindings and I though that
> CPU type was the best way to indicate version in the compatible
> string.  This is also how it's done for the ARM GIC and arch timers.
> Perhaps the best thing to do is to require both a core-specific
> ("mti,interaptiv-gic") and generic ("mti,gic") compatible string and
> just match on the generic one for now until there's a need to use the
> core-specific one.  Thoughts?

FPGA boards like Malta are something else to consider (when it is
eventually converted to DT - Paul on CC knows more than me). You might
load an interAptiv, or a proAptiv, or a P5600 bitstream, and the gic
setup will be pretty much the same I think, since e.g. the address
depends on where it is convenient to put it in the address space of the
platform.

Any thoughts on the existence of current_cpu_type(), and the GIC
revision register? They pretty much make encoding of core in compatible
string redundant I think.

Cheers
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/