Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755818AbbHFM3k (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2015 08:29:40 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f45.google.com ([209.85.218.45]:34618 "EHLO mail-oi0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755161AbbHFM3j convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2015 08:29:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55C35194.60308@redhat.com> References: <1438858816-29385-1-git-send-email-markmb@redhat.com> <1438858987-29566-1-git-send-email-markmb@redhat.com> <55C35194.60308@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 13:29:39 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] QEMU fw_cfg DMA interface documentation From: Stefan Hajnoczi To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Mar=C3=AD?= , linux-kernel , Drew , "Kevin O'Connor" , Gerd Hoffmann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1588 Lines: 34 On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 08/06/15 14:12, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Marc Marí wrote: >>> Add fw_cfg DMA interface specfication in the fw_cfg documentation. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Marí >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fw-cfg.txt | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fw-cfg.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fw-cfg.txt >>> index 953fb64..c880eec 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fw-cfg.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fw-cfg.txt >>> @@ -49,6 +49,41 @@ The guest kernel is not expected to use these registers (although it is >> >> Please update the "=== Revision (Key 0x0001, FW_CFG_ID) ===" section >> to say that currently the revision is 2. > > Sorry I haven't started reading the series yet, but this caught my eye > -- can we agree that this field should be a bitmap instead, and not a > counter-like value? I don't insist of course, because for the current > use case both approaches will work. But, for "future proofing", I think > it is useful to express features independently of each other. (See eg. > virtio feature flags.) Good idea. Stefan -- 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/