From: "pankaj.dubey" <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>, Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>, m.reichl@fivetechno.de, a.hajda@samsung.com, cwchoi00@gmail.com, Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/12] ARM: EXYNOS: refactor of mach-exynos to use chipid information Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 14:55:43 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <485f9aaa-3c32-5996-e7f0-9fa1a589e39b@samsung.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1GobLFjVXySXHGYBXscMaTcL8nzv183Reho87+U3Z5cA@mail.gmail.com> On Friday 31 March 2017 01:52 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:01 AM, pankaj.dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> wrote: >> On Thursday 30 March 2017 07:31 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> wrote: >>> >>> This seems really overcomplicated. From what I can tell, this is only needed >>> to find the SCU address, but there are better ways to do that, either by >>> looking up the SCU in the DT at the time you actually need it, >>> or by calling scu_a9_get_base(). >> >> Indeed it's complicated and ugly, for the same reason I attempted to >> clean-up this part for Exynos SoC in patch series [1], which was >> accepted by Samsung maintainer Krzysztof and later during pull request >> rejected by ARM maintainers [2] >> >> [1]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg540498.html >> [2]: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1612.0/01508.html >> >> Given the argument we can't adopt getting base address of SCU completely >> via DT without breaking OLD dtbs at some point, difficult to simplify >> these stuffs. >> >> Please guide which is the best way to handle such stuffs. >> >> In fact I made another attempt [3] to cleanup this SCU related stuffs >> for other ARM based platforms, but we could not arrive on some consensus >> at that time. I will try to attempt it again soon. >> >> [3]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg542351.html > > I very much appreciate your attempts, this is very helpful. I'm sorry > for making it so hard for you. I had remembered your previous series, > but did not realize that you were the author of both this patch and > the SCU cleanup. > > Let me try to understand the entire problem space better. These > are my assumptions based on what you write: > > - A clean solution would be to map the SCU based on the DT as > you implemented in the earlier patch series, but that breaks > running new kernels with old DTBs, which we don't want. > > - Another clean solution would be to map the SCU based on > scu_a9_get_base(), but that doesn't work on all variants of > exynos4, because there is at least one (which?) that has incorrect > data in the register Sorry, I am also not aware which variant does not support this. Currently for none of exynos4 we are using scu_a9_get_base(), and due to unavailability of all exynos4 based board with me, I can't test it. > > - The approach in this patch works, but is really ugly as it > requires parsing the fdt. > > Assuming that we don't want any of the approaches above, > here are some other ideas that might be a little better: > > - Map the SCU later, just before we first need for calling > scu_enable(): exynos_smp_prepare_cpus(), > exynos_enter_aftr() or exynos_pm_resume(). All three > are late enough that we can simply call ioremap() > on the known physical address for the first caller, > and they are all guarded by a > ARM_CPU_PART_CORTEX_A9 check that should > be equivalent to the EXYNOS4 check you have. > OK, let me try this, I think I can shift it at a little later point of boot. > - Split the exynos4 machine descriptor from the one > for exynos5, and exynos3, the call the iotable_init > unconditionally for exynos4. The same method would > also let us get rid of some of the other > of_machine_is_compatible() checks. > Once we move SCU mapping to later point of time, iotable_init can be dropped. Currently only for SCU mapping it is getting called. So this part will become more clean. Thanks for suggestion. I will work on it and submit next version. Pankaj Dubey > Arnd > > >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: pankaj.dubey@samsung.com (pankaj.dubey) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH v9 12/12] ARM: EXYNOS: refactor of mach-exynos to use chipid information Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:55:43 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <485f9aaa-3c32-5996-e7f0-9fa1a589e39b@samsung.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1GobLFjVXySXHGYBXscMaTcL8nzv183Reho87+U3Z5cA@mail.gmail.com> On Friday 31 March 2017 01:52 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:01 AM, pankaj.dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> wrote: >> On Thursday 30 March 2017 07:31 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com> wrote: >>> >>> This seems really overcomplicated. From what I can tell, this is only needed >>> to find the SCU address, but there are better ways to do that, either by >>> looking up the SCU in the DT at the time you actually need it, >>> or by calling scu_a9_get_base(). >> >> Indeed it's complicated and ugly, for the same reason I attempted to >> clean-up this part for Exynos SoC in patch series [1], which was >> accepted by Samsung maintainer Krzysztof and later during pull request >> rejected by ARM maintainers [2] >> >> [1]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg540498.html >> [2]: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1612.0/01508.html >> >> Given the argument we can't adopt getting base address of SCU completely >> via DT without breaking OLD dtbs at some point, difficult to simplify >> these stuffs. >> >> Please guide which is the best way to handle such stuffs. >> >> In fact I made another attempt [3] to cleanup this SCU related stuffs >> for other ARM based platforms, but we could not arrive on some consensus >> at that time. I will try to attempt it again soon. >> >> [3]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg542351.html > > I very much appreciate your attempts, this is very helpful. I'm sorry > for making it so hard for you. I had remembered your previous series, > but did not realize that you were the author of both this patch and > the SCU cleanup. > > Let me try to understand the entire problem space better. These > are my assumptions based on what you write: > > - A clean solution would be to map the SCU based on the DT as > you implemented in the earlier patch series, but that breaks > running new kernels with old DTBs, which we don't want. > > - Another clean solution would be to map the SCU based on > scu_a9_get_base(), but that doesn't work on all variants of > exynos4, because there is at least one (which?) that has incorrect > data in the register Sorry, I am also not aware which variant does not support this. Currently for none of exynos4 we are using scu_a9_get_base(), and due to unavailability of all exynos4 based board with me, I can't test it. > > - The approach in this patch works, but is really ugly as it > requires parsing the fdt. > > Assuming that we don't want any of the approaches above, > here are some other ideas that might be a little better: > > - Map the SCU later, just before we first need for calling > scu_enable(): exynos_smp_prepare_cpus(), > exynos_enter_aftr() or exynos_pm_resume(). All three > are late enough that we can simply call ioremap() > on the known physical address for the first caller, > and they are all guarded by a > ARM_CPU_PART_CORTEX_A9 check that should > be equivalent to the EXYNOS4 check you have. > OK, let me try this, I think I can shift it at a little later point of boot. > - Split the exynos4 machine descriptor from the one > for exynos5, and exynos3, the call the iotable_init > unconditionally for exynos4. The same method would > also let us get rid of some of the other > of_machine_is_compatible() checks. > Once we move SCU mapping to later point of time, iotable_init can be dropped. Currently only for SCU mapping it is getting called. So this part will become more clean. Thanks for suggestion. I will work on it and submit next version. Pankaj Dubey > Arnd > > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-03 9:22 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 98+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top [not found] <CGME20170330131417epcas1p48a7f41b90177294b7918ecf31df130d1@epcas1p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:16 ` [PATCH v9 00/12] Introducing Exynos ChipId driver Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:16 ` Pankaj Dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131419epcas5p4ac36250d3a9225643e327e60f47956c2@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:16 ` [PATCH v9 01/12] ARM: EXYNOS: refactor firmware specific routines Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:16 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-07 7:45 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 7:45 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 8:06 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 8:06 ` pankaj.dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131421epcas5p40b0ad9c1003d3ab807667ae2b05d25bc@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:16 ` [PATCH v9 02/12] ARM: EXYNOS: remove usage of soc_is_exynosMMMM from pm.c Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:16 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-07 8:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 8:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 12:12 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 12:12 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 12:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 12:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 14:13 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 14:13 ` pankaj.dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131424epcas5p4fccfab06e5d77d70d09c3835c3332ee5@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:16 ` [PATCH v9 03/12] ARM: EXYNOS: remove secondary startup initialization from smp_prepare_cpus Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:16 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-07 8:31 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 8:31 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 12:15 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 12:15 ` pankaj.dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131427epcas5p4c3d238022dc75694ad3baa8a1018ea04@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:16 ` [PATCH v9 04/12] soc: samsung: add exynos chipid driver support Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:16 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-30 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-31 5:36 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-03-31 5:36 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-03-31 8:09 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-31 8:09 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-04-03 9:21 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-03 9:21 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-03 7:57 ` Marek Szyprowski 2017-04-03 7:57 ` Marek Szyprowski 2017-04-03 9:35 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-03 9:35 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 9:13 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 9:13 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 12:18 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 12:18 ` pankaj.dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131429epcas5p414565c5a9f2c38f3f6660b72f9ad68a2@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:16 ` [PATCH v9 05/12] ARM: EXYNOS: enable exynos_chipid for ARCH_EXYNOS Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:16 ` Pankaj Dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131431epcas5p447a730e1bb194162f262a819ae665efb@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 06/12] ARM64: " Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:51 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-30 13:51 ` Arnd Bergmann [not found] ` <CGME20170330131434epcas1p4e42fe06bae3456c39e0f93a2f8ae4bc0@epcas1p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 07/12] ARM: EXYNOS: introduce soc specific pm ops Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 14:03 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-30 14:03 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-04-07 9:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 9:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 14:11 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 14:11 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 14:57 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 14:57 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [not found] ` <CGME20170330131436epcas1p4a4f8bf7b64b4a5ff9ee692adc4e7d001@epcas1p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move exynos_boot_vector_{addr,flag} ops to exynos_s2r_data Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move exynos_boot_vector_{addr, flag} " Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-07 10:32 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move exynos_boot_vector_{addr,flag} " Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 10:32 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move exynos_boot_vector_{addr, flag} " Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 13:52 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move exynos_boot_vector_{addr,flag} " pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 13:52 ` [PATCH v9 08/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move exynos_boot_vector_{addr, flag} " pankaj.dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131438epcas1p459ce93da17fcd05249eddaef18d5021e@epcas1p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 09/12] ARM: EXYNOS: introduce exynos_cpu_info struct Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-03 7:57 ` Marek Szyprowski 2017-04-03 7:57 ` Marek Szyprowski 2017-04-03 9:54 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-03 9:54 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 10:41 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 10:41 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 14:00 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 14:00 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 14:18 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 14:18 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 10:47 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 10:47 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [not found] ` <CGME20170330131440epcas1p4f27192272761aa593b6cf083453e8adc@epcas1p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 10/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move power_{down,up} to per SoC struct exynos_cpu_info Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 10/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move power_{down, up} " Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-07 12:04 ` [PATCH v9 10/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move power_{down,up} " Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 12:04 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 14:12 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-04-07 14:12 ` pankaj.dubey [not found] ` <CGME20170330131442epcas5p4f2be72cb3ec506847d8e832675e682c4@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 11/12] ARM: EXYNOS: move cpu_restart as a SoC specific hook to exynos_cpu_info Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-04-07 12:23 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2017-04-07 12:23 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [not found] ` <CGME20170330131444epcas5p45051cf7e6ec7a993c2c9f84254b89a19@epcas5p4.samsung.com> 2017-03-30 13:17 ` [PATCH v9 12/12] ARM: EXYNOS: refactor of mach-exynos to use chipid information Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 13:17 ` Pankaj Dubey 2017-03-30 14:01 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-30 14:01 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-31 6:01 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-03-31 6:01 ` pankaj.dubey 2017-03-31 8:22 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-03-31 8:22 ` Arnd Bergmann 2017-04-03 9:25 ` pankaj.dubey [this message] 2017-04-03 9:25 ` pankaj.dubey
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=485f9aaa-3c32-5996-e7f0-9fa1a589e39b@samsung.com \ --to=pankaj.dubey@samsung.com \ --cc=a.hajda@samsung.com \ --cc=arnd@arndb.de \ --cc=cwchoi00@gmail.com \ --cc=javier@osg.samsung.com \ --cc=kgene@kernel.org \ --cc=krzk@kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=m.reichl@fivetechno.de \ --cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.