Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 14:33:57 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "palmer@sifive.com" <palmer@sifive.com>,
        "jason@lakedaemon.net" <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        "marc.zyngier@arm.com" <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        "robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "aou@eecs.berkeley.edu" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        "anup@brainfault.org" <anup@brainfault.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        "shorne@gmail.com" <shorne@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] RISC-V: Support per-hart timebase-frequency
Message-ID: <20180803123357.GC18301@lst.de>
References: <20180802115008.4031-1-hch@lst.de> <20180802115008.4031-10-hch@lst.de> <fef973e1-6efc-0eff-2789-4a4b5b01900b@wdc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <fef973e1-6efc-0eff-2789-4a4b5b01900b@wdc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 03:19:49PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
> On 8/2/18 4:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
>>
>> Follow the updated DT specs and read the timebase-frequency from the
>> CPU 0 node.
>>
>
> However, the DT in the HighFive Unleashed has the entry at the wrong place.
>
> Even the example in github also at wrong place.
> https://github.com/riscv/riscv-device-tree-doc/pull/8/commits/2461d481329c55005fcbe684f0d6bdb3b7f0a432
>
> DT should be consistent between Documentation and the one in the hardware. 
> I can fix them in bbl & submit a bbl patch. But I am not sure if that's an 
> acceptable way to do it.

I'll need to have comments from Palmer and/or someone else at SiFive
here.  Personally I really don't care where we document the timebase,
as this patch supports both locations anywhere.  For now I'll just update
the commit log to state that more explicitly.