From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDF8BECDE46 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 16:53:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83EA3207DD for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 16:53:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 83EA3207DD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727586AbeJYBWl (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Oct 2018 21:22:41 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f193.google.com ([209.85.167.193]:34226 "EHLO mail-oi1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727535AbeJYBWl (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Oct 2018 21:22:41 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f193.google.com with SMTP id 20-v6so4678543oip.1; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:53:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=9wnzo/fjgFoqpVEw9Od+hUuoxdFlrZ6oPYjM0/LOPyQ=; b=sOh9IgcYXU7dwhKQA4YZzCBkqQO1zHDzSDNDwjuJbfla50ReCO5e8iYBDTpeOq6Wjq hj/8VNILhxJescC1hPUv3reIpnk77Lfn3PQC4IxJS7mOEp8sZH1wY1jetGO8ec2VWKHm L5+JRfPyJF+7hh2I+R7UWBzK0aMc8dEAOx5zT4vkwBXycB0xAYPgqUyCKOBfkyi5orNl nV1l3Nuf6oBM3DIbmqqaMLS92t2F0T5e5uQYXKhactnQ4yoq/58IGDhb798MVxuabsqg 5jfLVEEJmbfdHPWHUnvto2ATlpFiIXk/nfsIlad7LULIu4W0H+9BxNbb9cFA6+ET/YXI 2ZAA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJYr4BTDRg2Nw/EnGCZ64LUZ46I2+3Y/ot0WANWLoV7ZMqWS45Y 2GI6EESZeBtoVRHzxY/vmw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eUJtzcf52Qxko/WbSXxCJmakKplq/IlyHOroaN3JY6fLwXr/5oKeOgt3JpGjiGgCo+ylj58A== X-Received: by 2002:aca:ed57:: with SMTP id l84-v6mr1779271oih.188.1540400031059; Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:53:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (24-155-109-49.dyn.grandenetworks.net. [24.155.109.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r83-v6sm1633007oia.55.2018.10.24.09.53.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:53:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 11:53:49 -0500 From: Rob Herring To: Palmer Dabbelt Cc: Paul Walmsley , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , mark.rutland@arm.com, paul@pwsan.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: serial: add documentation for the SiFive UART driver Message-ID: <20181024165349.GA5652@bogus> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 09:41:51AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:45:57 PDT (-0700), robh+dt@kernel.org wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 1:48 PM Paul Walmsley wrote: > > > > > > Add DT binding documentation for the Linux driver for the SiFive > > > asynchronous serial IP block. Nothing too exotic. > > > > > > Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > > > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > > > Cc: Rob Herring > > > Cc: Mark Rutland > > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt > > > Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley > > > --- > > > .../bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt | 21 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..8982338512f5 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt > > > @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ > > > +SiFive asynchronous serial interface (UART) > > > + > > > +Required properties: > > > + > > > +- compatible: should be "sifive,fu540-c000-uart0" or "sifive,uart0" > > > > I assume once again, the last '0' is a version? As I mentioned for the > > intc and now the pwm block bindings, if you are going to do version > > numbers please document the versioning scheme. Palmer mentioned the > > compatible string is part of the IP block repository? Where does the > > number come from? What's the next version? Major vs. minor versions? > > ECO fixes? Is the version s/w readable? How do you ensure it gets > > updated? All that should be addressed. > > The RISC-V ecosystem is a bit different than that of ARM, MIPS, or Intel in > that the ISA is an royalty-free open standard that anyone can implement (ie, > without even signing a license agreement), with only the "RISC-V" trademark > being held behind a pay+conformance wall. As a result, we don't actually > have any control over who builds a RISC-V chip so all we at SiFive can > really to is try to demonstrate good practices in software land and go from > there. Rights to the ISA and cores may be different, but how chips are built is not really all that different (or doesn't have to be). > As far as SiFive's codebase is concerned, the version number is embedded in > the RTL generator, and a device tree is generated along with the RTL. This > device tree is then embedded into a mask ROM on the chip, which allows the > earliest stage of boot to proceed. As I'm sure you know, boot is a very > complicated process and as a result the device tree passed to Linux doesn't > necessarily look like what's in the ROM, but the intent is to keep iterating > until we can get these as similar as possible -- that's why we're submitting > every devicetree binding to the standard. So all this discussion is purely SiFive specific and really has nothing to do with RISC-V ecosystem. Putting the DT into the ROM isn't something I'd do. It's simply not going to work timeline wise IMO. > Specifically as far as the UART is concerned, the compat string that's not > chip-specific lives here (the "sifive,fu540-c000-uart" string lives in an > internal chip repo that I can't point to): > > https://github.com/sifive/sifive-blocks/blob/master/src/main/scala/devices/uart/UART.scala#L43 > > The version numbering scheme right now is pretty simple: I try to pay as > much attention as possible to how the hardware changes (both by looking and > with some automation), and I go yell at anyone who does something stupid. I > know it's not the most scalable of schemes, but it's the best we have. The > UART is actually an interesting case right now because we have an > outstanding pull request that adds a bit to the UART and then adds > "sifive,uart1" to the compat string > > https://github.com/sifive/sifive-blocks/pull/90 Relying on people to catch whether changes are important or not is bound to fail. It's really got to be built into the design flow. Even just updating a version register I've experienced the h/w designers forgetting to update it. > My intent is to ensure that the device tree's compat string uniquely > identifies the software interface to a block. Thus, whenever a device's > implementation changes in a software-visible way (bug fix or feature > addition) we change the compat string -- either adding one (as is the case > of the UART, where the compat string will be both "sifive,uart1" and > "sifive,uart0" since the new feature is backwards compatible with the old > software) or changing one (if the interface change is not compatible with > old software). What about config options? Say the UART has a configurable FIFO size. What about major vs. minor version changes? Respins of chips would need to make minor changes if picking up major changes are deemed too risky. > Like I said above, this is all a manual process right now and this only > applies to SiFive's implementations. I'm confident that I can at least > ensure that, for any given SiFive implementation, a block's compat string > will uniquely identify the software interface to it. For the rest of the > RISC-V world all we can do is set a good example and review the software. This is all good information and is essentially what I'm looking for. I just don't want it lost in a reply to an email, but something you can reference. Look at bindings/arm/primecell.txt for example. That describes a family of IP blocks and not any specific device. Whether the versioning is sufficient or not, I don't really care as long as you docuemnt what it is so it is consistent. Since you have a common schema across IP blocks, that means you should have a common document. Rob