Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754957Ab1F0Xzd (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:55:33 -0400 Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:56025 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755579Ab1F0Xys convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:54:48 -0400 From: "Grosen, Mark" To: Grant Likely CC: Ohad Ben-Cohen , davinci-linux-open-source , Arnd Bergmann , Brian Swetland , Rusty Russell , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: RE: [RFC 1/8] drivers: add generic remoteproc framework Thread-Topic: [RFC 1/8] drivers: add generic remoteproc framework Thread-Index: AQHML+SIQi02E6+wtECtfcP+kXbIPpTSC5UA//+3jZCAAGK6gP//xDIA Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:54:30 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1308640714-17961-1-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com> <1308640714-17961-2-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com> <20110627204958.GB20865@ponder.secretlab.ca> <20110627222401.GE20865@ponder.secretlab.ca> In-Reply-To: <20110627222401.GE20865@ponder.secretlab.ca> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [128.247.5.50] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1462 Lines: 31 > From: Grant Likely > Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 3:24 PM > > Our AMPs (remote processors) have a variety of boot mechanisms that vary > > across the different SoCs (yes, TI likes HW diversity). In some cases, the > > boot address is more like an entry point and that comes from the firmware, > > so it is not a static attribute of a driver. Correct me if I misunderstood > > your question. > > More to the point, I would expect the boot_address to be a property of > the rproc instance because it represents the configuration of the > remote processor. It seems odd that the caller of ->start would know > better than the rproc driver about the entry point of the processor. > > g. Yes, in many cases the boot_address will be defined by the HW. However, we have processors that are "soft" - the boot_address comes from the particular firmware being loaded and can (will) be different with each firmware image. We factored out the firmware loader to be device-independent (in remoteproc.c) so it's not repeated in each device-specific implementation like omap_remoteproc.c and davinci_remoteproc.c. In the cases where the HW dictates what happens, the start() method should just ignore the boot_address. Mark -- 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/