Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:2726:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ib38csp147997pxb; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:32:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUODCEVkytZpSoxcw/w8NvRa2Koa0ZSAvTHm9de500rfSWmprFGX5e+H9O5AHf78HOYB49 X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7288:b0:6df:d1a6:a7d with SMTP id dt8-20020a170907728800b006dfd1a60a7dmr32553954ejc.726.1648542724501; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:32:04 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1648542724; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=WurVORchrI7mlrgZsVGeysTouLUxETogrQKcvFUA3U/vTR+c5TKZ+gVPzsmj7B3b41 P4QvsdcjrozJkBsBAAsrSRImOmbCQo8c+Vt01iP440dO6/zv3FzOMaSR9dd/3J9mXoLi cKJag68sUupobGReE65T53+vtORPjQxKgvGJj4I89jl2gw/QbEKUASJIAE33wxgd1SZW vJOhWw4yVNVwykE6HQ9VTOrs3tiS8kA1F0HwmKR6Y8uzi0/WKtTBZjm+0XcsZFO9XRve esL0e2cIUPXhWTkwxvu6HOUpMfk5k61l1Mmw+dA5hygAZXITTVM6/n9BMMSnILMoUey2 Tdtg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from :references:cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:dkim-signature; bh=iy7r0xSIKEOkBGWHBfSEncVm9i95ujXK7frgNarsBVU=; b=yakfXms7w1eEtngguCYIkNlZD6EsPof5CMZ/jmW/iJPJiklTS6ZNXMJCuP6quTzcTK qnmxxsDRVkEj7Kk8zfle1IEdmgm2Q290SUNZ/lta0XNwSKTTNziycjcOAjisvvJWVCtq lQbYQbP8GJx4pvXRm2bF9NaoaAD2mr8WFlGIDlpFXmLiJZY3uuTNLdzlq3e9FKHt5NSC bMaKOMXRnOHsxdB4tZEYYrWnn7AveBnJwFYcAauUaXbE8I7CImJYkqdtlc+8o685Ra8H fmxE6A8UAScB4+rOECYIYljk9r8dWbykf9b8QDAutsfDemVRyK+GcpHyeYJBWltv/TC0 MQhw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=hsjansLg; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l14-20020a170906644e00b006df76385d1csi15510911ejn.444.2022.03.29.01.31.39; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:32:04 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=hsjansLg; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233117AbiC2Gny (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 02:43:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38360 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229966AbiC2Gnv (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 02:43:51 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26E98249C59; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 23:42:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4183161512; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 06:42:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3FC09C2BBE4; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 06:42:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1648536126; bh=KcEfxDe9kAuDSImnqtYl4PiodQh5LDPDefrNdl/cgeY=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=hsjansLgElHV/CJ6UrvWUBFL9ehiJ8W+cyFqgsqeICUkD3gqmTsAqKN5yX+sW0hyF f9HJWY0TpFwLGUg+qR+O7vd1JTJ84MnWNOI4gvtiQpDzgUGNiqMO8vfajPdD8M3GTW +QQNzk8AB0NkU37mPoNkmB2/Wt8mOKzFbEWs4wcbaUOOlKVlMTaCIHVx2d7+139sBm kiZuWC4T2LrEE0BNsDb1mM0q72qxfRk6k4NLC2kMI4WtOQA0qkszfEd0c4pKajMyxH EJ6tKbNMpP5KGr+5jfT6iVPQcfKAjBG0Pd4V42i87Io+fFb5Qil6sz0OzHPosEZ4dy VvIIcistU0Z0w== Message-ID: <6dec8b28-5e6e-b53b-6351-aaa797d9078d@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:41:59 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver Content-Language: en-US To: wangseok.lee@samsung.com, "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "krzk+dt@kernel.org" , "kishon@ti.com" , "vkoul@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "jesper.nilsson@axis.com" , "lars.persson@axis.com" Cc: "bhelgaas@google.com" , "linux-phy@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com" , "kw@linux.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@axis.com" , "kernel@axis.com" , =?UTF-8?B?7KCE66y46riw?= References: <564c7092-d6a3-7766-d83f-9762075d055f@kernel.org> <0716d9e4-24e1-d16c-162c-00a8664296e1@kernel.org> <20220328014430epcms2p7063834feb0abdf2f38a62723c96c9ff1@epcms2p7> <20220328090200epcms2p8637d2a2e09a3a627be776586b80c8adf@epcms2p8> <20220328112918epcms2p44bfdd6ef74c14f04bae6a475054860b6@epcms2p4> <20220329034949epcms2p1717d820646c878f314b03e07c2d092ba@epcms2p1> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski In-Reply-To: <20220329034949epcms2p1717d820646c878f314b03e07c2d092ba@epcms2p1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 29/03/2022 05:49, 이왕석 wrote: >> --------- Original Message --------- >> Sender : Krzysztof Kozlowski  >> Date : 2022-03-28 20:44 (GMT+9) >> Title : Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver >> >> On 28/03/2022 13:29, 이왕석 wrote: >>>>  --------- Original Message --------- >>>>  Sender : Krzysztof Kozlowski  >>>>  Date : 2022-03-28 18:38 (GMT+9) >>>>  Title : Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver >>>> >>>>  On 28/03/2022 11:02, 이왕석 wrote: >>>>>>   --------- Original Message --------- >>>>>>   Sender : Krzysztof Kozlowski  >>>>>>   Date : 2022-03-28 16:12 (GMT+9) >>>>>>   Title : Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver >>>>>> >>>>>>   On 28/03/2022 03:44, 이왕석 wrote: >>>>>>>    This series patches include newly PCIe support for Axis ARTPEC-8 SoC. >>>>>>>    ARTPEC-8 is the SoC platform of Axis Communications. >>>>>>>    PCIe controller driver and phy driver have been newly added. >>>>>>>    There is also a new MAINTAINER in the addition of phy driver. >>>>>>>    PCIe controller is designed based on Design-Ware PCIe controller IP >>>>>>>    and PCIe phy is desinged based on SAMSUNG PHY IP. >>>>>>>    It also includes modifications to the Design-Ware controller driver to  >>>>>>>    run the 64bit-based ARTPEC-8 PCIe controller driver. >>>>>>>    It consists of 6 patches in total. >>>>>>>     >>>>>>>    This series has been tested on AXIS SW bring-up board  >>>>>>>    with ARTPEC-8 chipset. >>>>>> >>>>>>   You lost mail threading. This makes reading this difficult for us. Plus >>>>>>   you sent something non-applicable (patch #2), so please resend. >>>>>> >>>>>>   Knowing recent Samsung reluctance to extend existing drivers and always >>>>>>   duplicate, please provide description/analysis why this driver cannot be >>>>>>   combined with existing driver. The answer like: we need several syscon >>>>>>   because we do not implement other frameworks (like interconnect) are not >>>>>>   valid. >>>>>> >>>>>>   Best regards, >>>>>>   Krzysztof >>>>>    >>>>>   Hello, Krzysztof >>>>>   Thanks for your review. >>>>>    >>>>>   patch#2 was sent to the wrong format so sent again. >>>>>   Sorry for causing confusion. >>>>    >>>>  The first sending was HTML. Second was broken text, so still not working. >>>> >>>>  Please resend everything with proper threading. >>>   >>>  Hello, Krzysztof >>>   >>>  I sent patch#2 three times. >>>  due to the influence of the email system, >>>  there was something wrong with the first and second mails. >>>  Sorry for causing confusion. >>>  Did you receive the third patch i sent you? >> >> Maybe, I don't know. It's not threaded so it's difficult to find it >> among other 100 emails... > > I think you also received a normal patch# 2. > >>>    >>>>>   This patch is specialized in Artpec-8,  >>>>>   the SoC Platform of Axis Communication, and is newly applied. >>>>>   Since the target SoC platform is different from the driver previously  >>>>>   used by Samsung, it is difficult to merge with the existing driver. >>>> >>>>  Recently I always saw such answers and sometimes it was true, sometimes >>>>  not. What is exactly different? >>>> >>>>  Best regards, >>>>  Krzysztof >>>   >>>  The main reason this patch should be added is that >>>  this patch is not the driver applied to exynos platform. >> >> Still this does not explain why you need separate driver. > > PCIe driver of artpec-8 is not available in exynos platform. > because the PCIe of artpec and exynos have very different > hardware in SoC design. > Not only it is the SoC different, > but the hardware design of PCIe is also different. > Therefore, we are using driver's compatible > as axis, artpec8-pcie rather than samsung, artpec8-pcie. You keep repeating the same over and over. What is different? Drivers can support different devices, I already wrote it. Just because device is different does not mean it should have separate driver. > >>>  Because the SoC platform is different,  >>>  the IP configuration of PCIe is also different. >> >> What is exactly different? Usually drivers can support IP blocks with >> some differences... >> >>>  We will organize a driver for Artpec-8 platform and  >>>  if there is no special reason, maintain this  >>>  without adding it from the next series. >> >> I don't understand this. >> >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > Also, as you know, > exynos driver is designed according to exynos SoC platform, > so both function and variable names start with exynos. That's hardly a problem... > Compared to the existing exynos driver, > you can see that the structure and type of function are different. No, I cannot see it. You coded the driver that way, you can code it in other way. > For this reason, it is difficult to use the existing exynos driver > for artpec. Naming of functions and structures is not making it difficult. That's not the reason. > Our idea is to register a new PCIe driver for artpec-8 SoC platform > and maintain it in the future. We also want to maintain Exynos PCIe driver in the future. Best regards, Krzysztof