All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
	"linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	'Tony Lindgren' <tony@atomide.com>,
	"devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org"
	<devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"rob.herring@calxeda.com" <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
	'Thomas Abraham' <thomas.ab@samsung.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: specify all the per-cpu interrupts of arch timer for exynos5440
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:25:44 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50FFC1B0.8000601@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130123103614.GD32237@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Looping Marc, Benoit

On Wednesday 23 January 2013 04:06 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:05:18PM +0000, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>
>> + devicetree-discuss, Grant Likely, Rob Herring and Tony Lindgren
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:41:27AM +0000, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>>>> From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@samsung.com>
>>>>
>>>> Need to be changed requirements in the 'cpus' node for exynos5440
>>>> to specify all the per-cpu interrupts of arch timer.
>>>
>>> The node(s) for the arch timer should not be in the cpus/cpu@N nodes.
>>> Instead, there should be one node (in the root of the tree).
>>>
>> Well, I don't think so. As per my understanding, the local timers are
>> attached to every ARM cores (cpus) and it generates certain interrupt to the
>> GIC. So the correct representation for this in device tree is to include the
>> interrupts in the cpu nodes in dts file. Your comments  refer to a
>> limitation in the Linux kernel implementation of the arch_timer and it
>> should not result in representing the hardware details incorrectly in the
>> dts file.
>
> I disagree. The "correct representation" is whatever the devicetree binding
> documentation describes. It does not describe placing timer nodes in the cpu
> nodes.
>
This seems to be exact same topic what is getting discussed here [1]
Technically DT is suppose to represent how the hardware is rather than
how the bindings are done.

But as Marc pointed out, the approach taken currently is to not 
duplicate the banked information. The thread [1] isn't concluded
yet but looks like we might want to avoid duplicating the information
considering, more of such duplication needs to follow. e.g gic i/f

Am still waiting on what Benoit has to say ?

Regards,
Santosh

[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg85110.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: dts: specify all the per-cpu interrupts of arch timer for exynos5440
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:25:44 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50FFC1B0.8000601@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130123103614.GD32237@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Looping Marc, Benoit

On Wednesday 23 January 2013 04:06 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:05:18PM +0000, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>
>> + devicetree-discuss, Grant Likely, Rob Herring and Tony Lindgren
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:41:27AM +0000, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>>>> From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@samsung.com>
>>>>
>>>> Need to be changed requirements in the 'cpus' node for exynos5440
>>>> to specify all the per-cpu interrupts of arch timer.
>>>
>>> The node(s) for the arch timer should not be in the cpus/cpu at N nodes.
>>> Instead, there should be one node (in the root of the tree).
>>>
>> Well, I don't think so. As per my understanding, the local timers are
>> attached to every ARM cores (cpus) and it generates certain interrupt to the
>> GIC. So the correct representation for this in device tree is to include the
>> interrupts in the cpu nodes in dts file. Your comments  refer to a
>> limitation in the Linux kernel implementation of the arch_timer and it
>> should not result in representing the hardware details incorrectly in the
>> dts file.
>
> I disagree. The "correct representation" is whatever the devicetree binding
> documentation describes. It does not describe placing timer nodes in the cpu
> nodes.
>
This seems to be exact same topic what is getting discussed here [1]
Technically DT is suppose to represent how the hardware is rather than
how the bindings are done.

But as Marc pointed out, the approach taken currently is to not 
duplicate the banked information. The thread [1] isn't concluded
yet but looks like we might want to avoid duplicating the information
considering, more of such duplication needs to follow. e.g gic i/f

Am still waiting on what Benoit has to say ?

Regards,
Santosh

[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg85110.html

  reply	other threads:[~2013-01-23 10:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-22  1:41 [PATCH] ARM: dts: specify all the per-cpu interrupts of arch timer for exynos5440 Kukjin Kim
2013-01-22  1:41 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-22 10:15 ` Mark Rutland
2013-01-22 10:15   ` Mark Rutland
2013-01-22 22:05   ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-22 22:05     ` Kukjin Kim
2013-01-23 10:36     ` Mark Rutland
2013-01-23 10:36       ` Mark Rutland
2013-01-23 10:55       ` Santosh Shilimkar [this message]
2013-01-23 10:55         ` Santosh Shilimkar
     [not found]         ` <50FFC1B0.8000601-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
2013-01-24 12:42           ` Benoit Cousson
2013-01-24 12:42             ` Benoit Cousson
     [not found]             ` <51012C4B.5080300-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
2013-01-24 12:53               ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-01-24 12:53                 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-01-24 13:16             ` Marc Zyngier
2013-01-24 13:16               ` Marc Zyngier
2013-01-30  7:20               ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-01-30  7:20                 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-04 22:25                 ` kgene
2013-02-04 22:25                   ` kgene at kernel.org
2013-01-23 13:55       ` Rob Herring
2013-01-23 13:55         ` Rob Herring

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=50FFC1B0.8000601@ti.com \
    --to=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    --cc=b-cousson@ti.com \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
    --cc=thomas.ab@samsung.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.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: link
Be 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.