Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 19:25:29 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To:     Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
Cc:     palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        wefu@redhat.com, guoren@kernel.org, atishp@atishpatra.org,
        anup@brainfault.org, mick@ics.forth.gr, samuel@sholland.org,
        cmuellner@linux.com, philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu, krzk+dt@kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: riscv: document cbom-block-size
Message-ID: <20220518002529.GA1928329-robh@kernel.org>
References: <20220511214132.2281431-1-heiko@sntech.de>
 <20220511214132.2281431-2-heiko@sntech.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220511214132.2281431-2-heiko@sntech.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 11:41:30PM +0200, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> The Zicbom operates on a block-size defined for the cpu-core,
> which does not necessarily match other cache-sizes used.
> 
> So add the necessary property for the system to know the core's
> block-size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
> index d632ac76532e..b179bfd155a3 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
> @@ -63,6 +63,13 @@ properties:
>        - riscv,sv48
>        - riscv,none
>  
> +  riscv,cbom-block-size:
> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32

Any value 0-2^32 is valid? 

> +    description:
> +      Blocksize in bytes for the Zicbom cache operations. The block
> +      size is a property of the core itself and does not necessarily
> +      match other software defined cache sizes.

What about hardware defined cache sizes? I'm scratching my head as to 
what a 'software defined cache size' is.

> +
>    riscv,isa:
>      description:
>        Identifies the specific RISC-V instruction set architecture
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 
>