Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of xilinx.com designates
 149.199.62.198 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=149.199.62.198; helo=xsj-pvapexch01.xlnx.xilinx.com;
Envelope-to: git@xilinx.com,
 michal.simek@xilinx.com,
 rajan.vaja@xilinx.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
 robh+dt@kernel.org,
 krzk@kernel.org,
 monstr@monstr.eu,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <monstr@monstr.eu>,
        <git@xilinx.com>, Kalyani Akula <kalyani.akula@xilinx.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
        Manish Narani <manish.narani@xilinx.com>,
        Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@xilinx.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
References: <cover.1606917949.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com>
 <272e23e0123f02c559bfa4ada9de73eb197aced8.1606917949.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com>
 <X81fXtxvsc7KE7cK@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
 <99008851-6c12-3acc-6530-25af08429ff5@xilinx.com>
 <X86poiQSzv5Uva1r@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
From:   Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] arm64: dts: zynqmp: Add label for zynqmp_ipi
Message-ID: <4010c2d4-bee1-827b-1079-1f1bbf1f10d1@xilinx.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 08:26:41 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <X86poiQSzv5Uva1r@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Dec 2020 07:27:02.3888
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f3e62111-2264-4241-960f-08d89b4aa832
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 657af505-d5df-48d0-8300-c31994686c5c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=657af505-d5df-48d0-8300-c31994686c5c;Ip=[149.199.62.198];Helo=[xsj-pvapexch01.xlnx.xilinx.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SN1NAM02FT062.eop-nam02.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN6PR02MB4781
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Laurent,

On 07. 12. 20 23:16, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Michal,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 10:39:25AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On 06. 12. 20 23:46, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 03:06:05PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>> Add label which is used by bootloader for adding bootloader specific flag.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> U-Boot needs to add u-boot,dm-pre-reloc; property
>>>
>>> I'm not entirely sure what best practice rules are in this area, but
>>> shouldn't U-Boot locate the node by name instead of label ?
>>
>> Labels are not listed in dt binding and there are two approaches how to
>> reference nodes. Via full path with node name or via labels.
>> I do normally use labels which are much simple.
> 
> Note that labels require the DTB to be compiled with the -@ option,
> otherwise they're not present in the binary.

U-Boot is using different concept. You can see that there are a lot of
-u-boot.dtsi files in dts folders. These are automatically included to
DTS before DTC is called. It means you don't need to build overlay to
get merged.


> 
>> And also if you take a look how dtb looks like (convert back to dts) you
>> can see that for example aliases are using full path (just &label) but
>> clocks/gic which is the part of <> is handled via phandles as numbers.
>>
>> And labels names can vary and shouldn't be the part of binding doc as
>> far as I know. But I can be wrong of course.
> 
> The DT bindings should document the interface with the operating system,
> and if applicable, the boot loader. If the boot loader requires a
> particular label, then it becomes part of the ABI, and I think it should
> be documented in the bindings.

We have been discussing with Rob some month ago but didn't have a time
to do step further. Just keep it short Rob was ok to keep bootloader
binding inside Linux repo.

There is no hardcoding for a particular name. There is just a need to
have any label. U-Boot needs to have one property(e.g.
u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;) just to do early allocation.
The name is just reference and none is really looking for it. It is just
a way how to include it in much easier way.

Thanks,
Michal