From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751483AbdKVAgZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:36:25 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f170.google.com ([209.85.192.170]:45817 "EHLO mail-pf0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751408AbdKVAgY (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:36:24 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMa7mEPbz2e4naxOK3EYgD+Om005vWslCIuazmd74Tj6BYpaoehMzFZ1/YvjgnrLbGgU5UeqGA== Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:36:22 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:33:25 PST (-0800) Subject: Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node In-Reply-To: <20171121200832.d55khzcufo2owcff@latitude> CC: robh@kernel.org, j.neuschaefer@gmx.net, mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, patches@groups.riscv.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Palmer Dabbelt To: j.neuschaefer@gmx.net Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 (MHng) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:08:32 PST (-0800), j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:37:02AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > [...] >> This isn't really a big deal to me, as I'm only interested in RISC-V >> systems, but there's been some pushback on the concept of an SBI so it >> seemed like a simple way to allow people to build non-SBI (and there for not >> really RISC-V) systems. > > For those reading along: I suggested the /firmware/sbi node to Palmer, > because I'm interested in such "not really RISC-V" systems, (because it > makes the firmware's job easier to not implement the SBI — speaking with > my coreboot hat, here.) > >> One option that wouldn't require a device tree node >> would be to have Linux boot in machine mode [...] and then provide its >> own SBI implementation. > > I think this can work. OK, sounds good! From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Palmer Dabbelt Subject: Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 16:36:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <20171121200832.d55khzcufo2owcff@latitude> Mime-Version: 1.0 (MHng) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20171121200832.d55khzcufo2owcff@latitude> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Cc: robh-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, j.neuschaefer-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org, mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, patches-q3qR2WxjNRFS9aJRtSZj7A@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:08:32 PST (-0800), j.neuschaefer-hi6Y0CQ0nG0@public.gmane.org wrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:37:02AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > [...] >> This isn't really a big deal to me, as I'm only interested in RISC-V >> systems, but there's been some pushback on the concept of an SBI so it >> seemed like a simple way to allow people to build non-SBI (and there for not >> really RISC-V) systems. > > For those reading along: I suggested the /firmware/sbi node to Palmer, > because I'm interested in such "not really RISC-V" systems, (because it > makes the firmware's job easier to not implement the SBI — speaking with > my coreboot hat, here.) > >> One option that wouldn't require a device tree node >> would be to have Linux boot in machine mode [...] and then provide its >> own SBI implementation. > > I think this can work. OK, sounds good! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html