From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@kryo.se>,
Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] Documentation: dt: add common bindings for hwspinlock
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:56:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150122185622.GE12911@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54BFE855.3090200@ti.com>
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 05:56:37PM +0000, Suman Anna wrote:
> On 01/21/2015 06:41 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
> >> How about default to Linux id space and allow overriding that with
> >> a module param option if needed?
> >
> > I'm not sure I'm following.
> >
> > If the main point of contention is the base_id field, I'm also fine
> > with removing it entirely, as I'm not aware of any actual user for it
> > (Suman please confirm?).
>
> Yeah, well the current implementations that I am aware of only have a
> single bank, so all of them would be using a value of 0. I am yet to see
> a platform with multiple instances where the property really makes a
> difference. v7 has the property mandatory, so all the implementations
> would need to define this value even if it is 0.
>
> regards
> Suman
>
> >
> > Mark? Rob? Will you accept Suman's patches if the base_id field is removed?
My concern is that the mapping of hwspinlock IDs doesn't seem to be
explicit in the DT on a per-context basis, which is what I'd expect.
e.g.
lck: hwspinlock-device@f00 {
...
#hwlock-cells = <1>;
};
some-other-os-interface {
...
hwlocks = <&lck 0>, <&lck 1>, <&lck 2>, <&lck 3>;
hwlock-names = "glbl", "pool0", "pool1", "pool2";
};
a-different-os-interface {
...
hwlocks = <&lck 18>, <&lck 21>, <&lck 4>, <&lck 5>;
hwlock-names = "init", "teardown", "pool0", "pool1";
};
That's the only way I would expect this to possibly remain a stable
over time, and it's the entire reason for #hwlock-cells, no?
How do you expect the other components sharing the hwspinlocks to be
described?
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-22 18:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-14 20:58 [PATCH v7 0/4] hwspinlock core & omap dt support Suman Anna
2015-01-14 20:58 ` [PATCH v7 1/4] Documentation: dt: add common bindings for hwspinlock Suman Anna
2015-01-15 13:52 ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-15 13:55 ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-15 14:42 ` Rob Herring
2015-01-15 20:16 ` Suman Anna
2015-01-16 6:09 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-01-16 10:17 ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-17 0:46 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-01-20 18:05 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-01-21 12:41 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-01-21 17:56 ` Suman Anna
2015-01-22 18:56 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2015-01-29 3:58 ` Suman Anna
2015-02-11 11:29 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-16 18:06 ` Bjorn Andersson
2015-01-30 23:29 ` Bjorn Andersson
2015-01-31 5:41 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-02-01 11:00 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-02-02 21:14 ` Suman Anna
2015-02-01 17:55 ` Bjorn Andersson
2015-02-02 21:07 ` Suman Anna
2015-02-05 23:01 ` Bjorn Andersson
2015-02-06 0:11 ` Suman Anna
2015-02-06 0:34 ` Bjorn Andersson
2015-02-11 10:29 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-02-11 11:35 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-16 20:30 ` Bjorn Andersson
2015-01-16 10:19 ` Mark Rutland
2015-01-16 17:49 ` Suman Anna
2015-01-14 20:58 ` [PATCH v7 2/4] Documentation: dt: add the omap hwspinlock bindings document Suman Anna
2015-01-14 20:58 ` [PATCH v7 3/4] hwspinlock/core: add common OF helpers Suman Anna
2015-01-14 20:58 ` [PATCH v7 4/4] hwspinlock/omap: add support for dt nodes Suman Anna
2015-01-15 10:13 ` [PATCH v7 0/4] hwspinlock core & omap dt support Ohad Ben-Cohen
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=20150122185622.GE12911@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=bjorn@kryo.se \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=joshc@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
--cc=s-anna@ti.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).