From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752724AbcGLIt2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 04:49:28 -0400 Received: from mailout4.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.14]:50574 "EHLO mailout4.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751208AbcGLItF (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 04:49:05 -0400 X-AuditID: cbfec7f4-f796c6d000001486-3d-5784aefd17a0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: samsung: Add support for Exynos7 PMU To: Abhilash Kesavan References: <1467750507-13853-1-git-send-email-a.kesavan@samsung.com> <1467750507-13853-3-git-send-email-a.kesavan@samsung.com> Cc: linux-samsung-soc , linux-arm-kernel , Kukjin Kim , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" From: Krzysztof Kozlowski X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-id: <5784AEFC.7040406@samsung.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:49:00 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-version: 1.0 In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xa7p/17WEG0yZJGXx+oWhxZq/Sha9 C66yWWx6fI3V4vKuOWwWM87vY3Jg89g56y67x+Yl9R59W1YxenzeJBfAEsVlk5Kak1mWWqRv l8CVsebqXvaCv6IVH0+0sTYwrhHsYuTkkBAwkbh7p5sdwhaTuHBvPVsXIxeHkMBSRomuo/OY IZxnjBInT85gAqkSFnCSOP7gHzOILSJgKPF+51t2iKJ+JomT924zgTjMArcZJWatmQbWwSZg LLF5+RI2iB1yEr3dk1hAbF4BLYnd/ZeBbA4OFgFViUn3jEDCogIRErO2/2CCKBGU+DH5Hlg5 p0CwxMpz/1hBypkF1CWmTMkFCTMLyEtsXvOWeQKj4CwkHbMQqmYhqVrAyLyKUTS1NLmgOCk9 11CvODG3uDQvXS85P3cTIyTEv+xgXHzM6hCjAAejEg/vg9PN4UKsiWXFlbmHGCU4mJVEeD+v agkX4k1JrKxKLcqPLyrNSS0+xCjNwaIkzjt31/sQIYH0xJLU7NTUgtQimCwTB6dUA6O+66L4 nVeNPbYoVYiv9gssNo+xChUJeNN3t4zdyzLoms2x9NZvGr5qS0I6dUKuLEwu9nfu3Z9VNuEk W02Bn3JT45+1f9SixPr22bxzZZrIckG8YWLe/JPuE03vnZtrN/H/2rAd7WY+axpOPFe+Hv/o mm/jPJEFkzNvXdB/mHHM0mbqpJSwBCWW4oxEQy3mouJEAL+Ffi9tAgAA Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/11/2016 04:44 PM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > [...] >>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c >>> index 0acdfd8..7cda8fb 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c >>> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c >>> @@ -88,6 +88,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id exynos_pmu_of_device_ids[] = { >>> }, { >>> .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-pmu", >>> .data = &exynos5420_pmu_data, >>> + }, { >>> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos7-pmu", >>> + .data = &exynos7_pmu_data, >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for the patch. Few comments: > > Thanks for the review. >> >> You set here compatible for Exynos7. However there are at least three >> publicly known Exynos7 chipsets (7420, 7580, 7870 - >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exynos). My questions are: >> 1. Are all of these share the same PMU configuration? >> 2. New different Exynos7 may be released, right? > > Exynos7 is a Quad Core A57 based SoC that pre-dates all the above > mentioned SoCs. It is the closest to the exynos7420 in terms of the > IPs present. Hmm, okay... It is confusing because Samsung Semiconductors calls both 7420 and 5433 as "Exynos 7 Octa": http://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/w/solution/mobile_ap/7420/ The marketing uses term "Exynos7" for a generation of SoCs. However if there is really a design called Exynos7 and a board with it (Espresso), then I don't mind. Let it be Exynos7 but keeping in mind that this is a specific SoC, not a calls of products. > The PMU configuration between exynos7 and exynos7420 is > identical except for the extra A53 configuration required in case of > the 7420. That is additional argument in favor of "Exynos7" naming. > The PMU configuration for 7580 and 7870 differ from that of > eynos7 and 7420 in terms of the registers offsets, number of > registers being configured and some extra configurations. So, while > sharing of some functions is possible across the SoCs, each SoC should > ideally have its own PMU file. The posted patch adds PMU support for > only the exynos7 SoC. Thanks for explanation. >> >> The exynos7 compatible is already spread all over DTS... but probably >> it is safer to use a specific SoC revision. Unless you are sure that >> all Exynos7 SoCs will be 100% compatible here and there won't be >> another exynos7xxx-pmu. > Please let me know if I can continue to use the exynos7 compatible > since it is a distinct SoC and not indicative of a series. However, if > you feel strongly about it then I can change the compatible to use > 7420 since they are quite similar. Exynos7 is fine. Thanks for the details! Best regards, Krzysztof From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: k.kozlowski@samsung.com (Krzysztof Kozlowski) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:49:00 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] soc: samsung: Add support for Exynos7 PMU In-Reply-To: References: <1467750507-13853-1-git-send-email-a.kesavan@samsung.com> <1467750507-13853-3-git-send-email-a.kesavan@samsung.com> Message-ID: <5784AEFC.7040406@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/11/2016 04:44 PM, Abhilash Kesavan wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > [...] >>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c >>> index 0acdfd8..7cda8fb 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c >>> +++ b/drivers/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.c >>> @@ -88,6 +88,9 @@ static const struct of_device_id exynos_pmu_of_device_ids[] = { >>> }, { >>> .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-pmu", >>> .data = &exynos5420_pmu_data, >>> + }, { >>> + .compatible = "samsung,exynos7-pmu", >>> + .data = &exynos7_pmu_data, >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for the patch. Few comments: > > Thanks for the review. >> >> You set here compatible for Exynos7. However there are at least three >> publicly known Exynos7 chipsets (7420, 7580, 7870 - >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exynos). My questions are: >> 1. Are all of these share the same PMU configuration? >> 2. New different Exynos7 may be released, right? > > Exynos7 is a Quad Core A57 based SoC that pre-dates all the above > mentioned SoCs. It is the closest to the exynos7420 in terms of the > IPs present. Hmm, okay... It is confusing because Samsung Semiconductors calls both 7420 and 5433 as "Exynos 7 Octa": http://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/w/solution/mobile_ap/7420/ The marketing uses term "Exynos7" for a generation of SoCs. However if there is really a design called Exynos7 and a board with it (Espresso), then I don't mind. Let it be Exynos7 but keeping in mind that this is a specific SoC, not a calls of products. > The PMU configuration between exynos7 and exynos7420 is > identical except for the extra A53 configuration required in case of > the 7420. That is additional argument in favor of "Exynos7" naming. > The PMU configuration for 7580 and 7870 differ from that of > eynos7 and 7420 in terms of the registers offsets, number of > registers being configured and some extra configurations. So, while > sharing of some functions is possible across the SoCs, each SoC should > ideally have its own PMU file. The posted patch adds PMU support for > only the exynos7 SoC. Thanks for explanation. >> >> The exynos7 compatible is already spread all over DTS... but probably >> it is safer to use a specific SoC revision. Unless you are sure that >> all Exynos7 SoCs will be 100% compatible here and there won't be >> another exynos7xxx-pmu. > Please let me know if I can continue to use the exynos7 compatible > since it is a distinct SoC and not indicative of a series. However, if > you feel strongly about it then I can change the compatible to use > 7420 since they are quite similar. Exynos7 is fine. Thanks for the details! Best regards, Krzysztof