Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754648AbbHXU6w (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:58:52 -0400
Received: from mail-qk0-f175.google.com ([209.85.220.175]:33608 "EHLO
	mail-qk0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751540AbbHXU6t (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:58:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOesGMigmaEviCDBAncomkq+uowr18B5FTOmOyBHsNz4p6F6Dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1438618000-1091-1-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com>
 <1439287646.9747.212.camel@citrix.com> <CAL_JsqKv2aOEM-U7JNZnaHomA6HFBSFhSLZ-zhp7c20s6gQBaQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOesGMj46mvbdya1OQnZzL8VrxVwxAV3KoZZRtk3c0CTVx7d5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_Jsq+tUmRfvKE6vf+za6TsG_fhMWn5M2DDDLcCfkDt=KJGVg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOesGMigmaEviCDBAncomkq+uowr18B5FTOmOyBHsNz4p6F6Dw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 15:58:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqKu6B1Q1q38GFSkdAT+Gxg3=87uk8ZOGPH96Eni0cer_g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] dtb: Create a common home for cross-architecture dtsi files.
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, "arm@kernel.org" <arm@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
        Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
        Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 4474
Lines: 103

On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> +arm-soc
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 17:06 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>>>> Commit 9ccd608070b6 ("arm64: dts: add device tree for ARM SMM-A53x2 on
>>>>>> LogicTile Express 20MG") added a new dts file to arch/arm64 which
>>>>>> included "../../../../arm/boot/dts/vexpress-v2m-rs1.dtsi", i.e. a
>>>>>> .dtsi supplied by arch/arm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately this causes some issues for the split device tree
>>>>>> repository[0], since things get moved around there. In that context
>>>>>> the new .dts ends up at src/arm64/arm/vexpress-v2f-1xv7-ca53x2.dts
>>>>>> while the include is at src/arm/vexpress-v2m-rs1.dtsi.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Grant,
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think there is any chance of getting this into 4.2-rc$NEXT or shall
>>>>> we wait until 4.3? I'm assuming this should go via the DT tree, but maybe
>>>>> it should go via an ARM tree?
>>>>
>>>> I was assuming this would go thru the arm-soc tree which is why I
>>>> acked it. It is getting a bit late for 4.2 at this point, but I guess
>>>> the standalone tree remains broken for these platforms until this is
>>>> done. Probably not such a big deal in grand scheme of things.
>>>
>>> I'm cc:d in the far tail of a thread, so I'll just comment here
>>> instead of further up:
>>>
>>> I'm not a fan at all of creating kernel/dts/<arch>/*, at least if
>>> there's expected to be contents in there.
>>>
>>> We don't have include/linux/asm-<arch>/ in the common tree either.
>>> Let's not create that for dts.
>>
>> I'd really like to move ALL dts files from arch/*. There's nothing
>> really tied to the architecture. They may happen to use some bindings
>> that only apply to an architecture, but fundamentally they don't
>> depend on the arch. Also, I'd like to be able to do "make all-dtbs"
>> and build every dtb in the tree.
>
> The main benefit of keeping it per architecture and platform is that
> it partitions the maintainer and review space a bit.

Except we have a fire hose and a bunch of dripping faucets.

> Right now it's not possible to do even per-arch "all-dtbs" since only
> the currently configured platforms will get their dtbs compiled.

I know. It's been on my todo list for a while. Having that per arch at
least would be an improvement. Having it arch independent would mean I
don't even need a cross-compiler (probably).

>> That said, I'm not crazy enough to propose this re-org in the kernel
>> tree, but would like to do that if/when we moved dts files out of the
>> kernel.
>
> I believe this is currently still quite firmly in the "if" stage. :(

There's some renewed discussion around it recently, but still no one
to step up and do it.

>>> So, while I'm all for a prefix-based sharing of DTSI files, I don't
>>> want them to go in a common kernel/dts directory.
>>>
>>> Besides sharing some snippets between arm and arm64, what else is
>>> expected to need to go into such a shared location today?
>>
>> Overlays. You easily have the same sharing of common boards. There are
>> also usecases of overlays on architectures that don't generally use DT
>> (x86).
>
> Ok, overlays might make sense if they can be made to work generically
> enough and not be tied to expectations of the base board platform.

That's the goal at least.

> Still, even then I don't see dts as a core kernel feature (kernel/*),
> lib/* might make more sense. And I don't want to see things like
> vexpress stuff in there.

How's it any different than vexpress board stuff under drivers/.

The original suggestion was under include/dt-bindings/. Not sure if
you saw or like that?

>> We could also see sharing between PPC and ARM on FSL networking parts,
>> but I've not heard if they actually have that problem.
>
> Yeah, there could potentially be some sharing between MIPS and
> ARM{,64} too, but I don't know if we'll actually see it done.

Yep, hard to say.

Rob
--
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/