Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Francois Ozog <francois.ozog@linaro.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Jose.Marinho@arm.com,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	harb@amperecomputing.com, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] firmware: smccc: Add ARCH_SOC_ID support
Date: Sat, 23 May 2020 21:40:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1+jjgOyJcRQm60RULjwtvWzvYK1QwrjOX_aRAbDGKuJg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200523172721.GC18810@bogus>

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 7:27 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 08:41:59PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 6:54 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>
> > jep106:5678 (the IMP_DEF_SOC_ID field in my example) would
> > probably be sufficient to not conflict with a another soc_device
> > driver, but is quite likely to clash with an ID used by another
> > manufacturer.
> >
>
> IIUC, you are fine with "jep106:1234:5678" where 1234 is jep106 manufacture
> id code and 5678 is soc_id as it may avoid all the conflicts across
> the manufacture namespaces.

I think either jep106:5678 or jep106:1234:5678 (or some variation with
different field separators if you prefer) would be fine here.

> > jep106:1234 (the manufacturer ID) in turn seems too broad from
> > the soc_id field, as that would include every chip made by one
> > company.
> >
>
> I understand, and IIUC you prefer this to be embedded with soc_id
> especially to avoid namespace conflicts which makes sense.
>
> Thanks for all the discussion and valuable inputs. I am now bit nervous
> to add SoC info from SMCCC ARCH_SOC_ID to sysfs yet as we need more info
> especially "machine" and "serial_number" for elsewhere(OEM firmware mostly
> from DT or ACPI).

I probably wouldn't mix those in with the same driver. If machine and
serial_number have no smccc interface, then they should be left out,
but there could be a separate soc_device that gets that information
by other means, usually using one of the existing hardware id register
drivers.

> TBH, the mix might be bit of a mess as there are soc drivers that rely
> on DT completely today. Anyways, this SOC_ID can be added as library that
> can be used by a *generic* soc driver once we define a standard way to
> fetch other information("machine" and "serial_number"). I am happy to
> get suggestions on that front especially from you and Francois as you
> have got some context already.

Well, I suppose we could have the entire data from the smccc interface
in a central place somewhere, such as (to stay with my example)
"1234:5678:9abcdef0" in an attribute of any soc_device driver that
adds a call to a library function for the jep106 ID, or possibly in
/sys/firmware or even a field added to /proc/cpuinfo.

       Arnd

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply index

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-22 12:49 [PATCH 0/2] base: soc: Add JEP106 manufacturer's identification code Sudeep Holla
2020-05-22 12:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] base: soc: Add JEDEC JEP106 manufacturer's identification code attribute Sudeep Holla
2020-05-22 12:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] firmware: smccc: Add ARCH_SOC_ID support Sudeep Holla
2020-05-22 14:46   ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-05-22 16:54     ` Sudeep Holla
2020-05-22 17:13       ` Sudeep Holla
2020-05-22 18:41       ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-05-23 17:27         ` Sudeep Holla
2020-05-23 19:40           ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2020-05-28 13:05             ` Jose Marinho

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=CAK8P3a1+jjgOyJcRQm60RULjwtvWzvYK1QwrjOX_aRAbDGKuJg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=Jose.Marinho@arm.com \
    --cc=francois.ozog@linaro.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=harb@amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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

Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/0 linux-arm-kernel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1 linux-arm-kernel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-arm-kernel linux-arm-kernel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel \
		linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
	public-inbox-index linux-arm-kernel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git