linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
To: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Sudeep Holla" <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	"Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
	frank.wang@rock-chips.com, khilman@baylibre.com,
	linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org,
	"Caesar Wang" <wxt@rock-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/9] mailbox: Add Amlogic Meson Message-Handling-Unit
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 20:36:14 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABb+yY3mD3chLtM02a5NvOO_HF2JAeu-SELkxzTxkkf5i+Bftg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57728319.5060701@baylibre.com>

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com> wrote:
> On 06/25/2016 07:50 PM, Jassi Brar wrote:
>> -#define INTR_STAT_OFS  0x0
>> -#define INTR_SET_OFS   0x8
>> -#define INTR_CLR_OFS   0x10
>> -
>> -#define MHU_LP_OFFSET  0x0
>> -#define MHU_HP_OFFSET  0x20
>> -#define MHU_SEC_OFFSET 0x200
>> -#define TX_REG_OFFSET  0x100
>> +#define INTR_SET_OFS   0x0
>> +#define INTR_STAT_OFS  0x4
>> +#define INTR_CLR_OFS   0x8
>>
>> -#define MHU_CHANS      3
>> +#define MHU_LP_OFFSET  0x10
>> +#define MHU_HP_OFFSET  0x1c
>> +
>> +#define TX_REG_OFFSET  0x24
>> +
>> +#define MHU_CHANS      2
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^ this is precisely the difference if we ignore cosmetic
>> differences. So the IP is essentially the same.
>
> Well, no. The overall design is similar. but clearly it's a different IP.
>
If your this patch works on your platform, then the diff from arm_mhu
tells the controller is the same but only with re-ordered registers.
And you already call it 'MHU' :)


>> [snip]
>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> From: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
>>> Subject: [PATCH] mailbox: arm_mhu: Add support for Amlogic Meson MHU
>>>
>> Is there some version of MHU specified anywhere in manuals? It seems
>> weird Amlogic took the IP and only rearranged the registers. Maybe the
>> order is specific to non-Amba version of the IP?  Lets call it that.
>
> I think Amlogic took an early Juno platform release and re-implemented the
> MHU using the same concept but following their design rules.
>
>>
>>> To achieve this integration, add support for generic probe from amba
>>> or platform.
>>> Move all register offsets to a data structure passed in either amba id or
>>> platform dt id match table.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/mailbox/arm_mhu.c | 217 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>  1 file changed, 181 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/arm_mhu.c b/drivers/mailbox/arm_mhu.c
>>> index 99befa7..d7fb843 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mailbox/arm_mhu.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/arm_mhu.c
>>> @@ -22,45 +22,68 @@
>>>  #include <linux/io.h>
>>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>>>  #include <linux/amba/bus.h>
>>> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
>>> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>>  #include <linux/mailbox_controller.h>
>>>
>>> -#define INTR_STAT_OFS  0x0
>>> -#define INTR_SET_OFS   0x8
>>> -#define INTR_CLR_OFS   0x10
>>> +#define MHU_INTR_STAT_OFS      0x0
>>> +#define MHU_INTR_SET_OFS       0x8
>>> +#define MHU_INTR_CLR_OFS       0x10
>>>
>>>  #define MHU_LP_OFFSET  0x0
>>>  #define MHU_HP_OFFSET  0x20
>>>  #define MHU_SEC_OFFSET 0x200
>>> -#define TX_REG_OFFSET  0x100
>>> +#define MHU_TX_REG_OFFSET      0x100
>>>
>>> -#define MHU_CHANS      3
>>> +#define MESON_INTR_SET_OFS     0x0
>>> +#define MESON_INTR_STAT_OFS    0x4
>>> +#define MESON_INTR_CLR_OFS     0x8
>>> +
>>> +#define MESON_MHU_LP_OFFSET    0x10
>>> +#define MESON_MHU_HP_OFFSET    0x1c
>>> +#define MESON_MHU_TX_OFFSET    0x24
>>> +
>>> +#define MAX_MHU_CHANS  3
>>>
>> MHU_CHANS always 3 doesn't hurt. Lets keep it unchanged.
>>
>>>  struct mhu_link {
>>>         unsigned irq;
>>> -       void __iomem *tx_reg;
>>> -       void __iomem *rx_reg;
>>> +       void __iomem *tx_stat_reg;
>>> +       void __iomem *tx_set_reg;
>>> +       void __iomem *tx_clr_reg;
>>> +       void __iomem *rx_stat_reg;
>>> +       void __iomem *rx_set_reg;
>>> +       void __iomem *rx_clr_reg;
>>>  };
>>
>> Yeah, this is OK.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>  struct arm_mhu {
>>>         void __iomem *base;
>>> -       struct mhu_link mlink[MHU_CHANS];
>>> -       struct mbox_chan chan[MHU_CHANS];
>>> +       struct mhu_link mlink[MAX_MHU_CHANS];
>>> +       struct mbox_chan chan[MAX_MHU_CHANS];
>>>         struct mbox_controller mbox;
>>>  };
>> just leave it MHU_CHANS
>>
>>>
>>> +struct arm_mhu_data {
>>> +       unsigned int channels;
>>> +       int rx_offsets[MAX_MHU_CHANS];
>>> +       int tx_offsets[MAX_MHU_CHANS];
>>> +       unsigned int intr_stat_offs;
>>> +       unsigned int intr_set_offs;
>>> +       unsigned int intr_clr_offs;
>>> +};
>> This is unnecessary. Please remove it and code will be simpler -
>> assign rx/tx_regs directly in probe.
>
> I won't assume the platform driver is only for Amlogic, it does not
> make sense.
>
It is unlikely other platforms will come with more random register
arrangements of MHU.


>>
>>> +
>>>  static irqreturn_t mhu_rx_interrupt(int irq, void *p)
>>>  {
>>>         struct mbox_chan *chan = p;
>>>         struct mhu_link *mlink = chan->con_priv;
>>>         u32 val;
>>>
>>> -       val = readl_relaxed(mlink->rx_reg + INTR_STAT_OFS);
>>> +       val = readl_relaxed(mlink->rx_stat_reg);
>>>         if (!val)
>>>                 return IRQ_NONE;
>>>
>>>         mbox_chan_received_data(chan, (void *)&val);
>>>
>>> -       writel_relaxed(val, mlink->rx_reg + INTR_CLR_OFS);
>>> +       writel_relaxed(val, mlink->rx_clr_reg);
>>>
>>>         return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>  }
>>> @@ -68,7 +91,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mhu_rx_interrupt(int irq, void *p)
>>>  static bool mhu_last_tx_done(struct mbox_chan *chan)
>>>  {
>>>         struct mhu_link *mlink = chan->con_priv;
>>> -       u32 val = readl_relaxed(mlink->tx_reg + INTR_STAT_OFS);
>>> +       u32 val = readl_relaxed(mlink->tx_stat_reg);
>>>
>>>         return (val == 0);
>>>  }
>>> @@ -78,7 +101,7 @@ static int mhu_send_data(struct mbox_chan *chan, void *data)
>>>         struct mhu_link *mlink = chan->con_priv;
>>>         u32 *arg = data;
>>>
>>> -       writel_relaxed(*arg, mlink->tx_reg + INTR_SET_OFS);
>>> +       writel_relaxed(*arg, mlink->tx_set_reg);
>>>
>>>         return 0;
>>>  }
>>> @@ -89,8 +112,8 @@ static int mhu_startup(struct mbox_chan *chan)
>>>         u32 val;
>>>         int ret;
>>>
>>> -       val = readl_relaxed(mlink->tx_reg + INTR_STAT_OFS);
>>> -       writel_relaxed(val, mlink->tx_reg + INTR_CLR_OFS);
>>> +       val = readl_relaxed(mlink->tx_stat_reg);
>>> +       writel_relaxed(val, mlink->tx_clr_reg);
>>>
>>>         ret = request_irq(mlink->irq, mhu_rx_interrupt,
>>>                           IRQF_SHARED, "mhu_link", chan);
>>> @@ -117,52 +140,155 @@ static const struct mbox_chan_ops mhu_ops = {
>>>         .last_tx_done = mhu_last_tx_done,
>>>  };
>>>
>>> -static int mhu_probe(struct amba_device *adev, const struct amba_id *id)
>>> +static struct arm_mhu_data arm_mhu_amba_data = {
>>> +       .channels = 3,
>>> +       .rx_offsets = {MHU_LP_OFFSET, MHU_HP_OFFSET, MHU_SEC_OFFSET},
>>> +       .tx_offsets = {MHU_LP_OFFSET + MHU_TX_REG_OFFSET,
>>> +                      MHU_HP_OFFSET + MHU_TX_REG_OFFSET,
>>> +                      MHU_SEC_OFFSET + MHU_TX_REG_OFFSET},
>>> +       .intr_stat_offs = MHU_INTR_STAT_OFS,
>>> +       .intr_set_offs = MHU_INTR_SET_OFS,
>>> +       .intr_clr_offs = MHU_INTR_CLR_OFS,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static const struct arm_mhu_data meson_mhu_data = {
>>> +       .channels = 2,
>>> +       .rx_offsets = {MESON_MHU_LP_OFFSET, MESON_MHU_HP_OFFSET},
>>> +       .tx_offsets = {MESON_MHU_LP_OFFSET + MESON_MHU_TX_OFFSET,
>>> +                      MESON_MHU_HP_OFFSET + MESON_MHU_TX_OFFSET},
>>> +       .intr_stat_offs = MESON_INTR_STAT_OFS,
>>> +       .intr_set_offs = MESON_INTR_SET_OFS,
>>> +       .intr_clr_offs = MESON_INTR_CLR_OFS,
>>> +};
>>> +
>> These could be directly set in amba vs platform probes ?
>
> It does not make sense to assume the platform driver is only for
> amlogic gxbb, it could match other vendors aswell.
>
Perhaps you didn't get my suggestion.

> The amba could force a single struct, but it's smarter to use the
> same mechanism and associate the struct to an ID.
>
>> Thanks.
>>
>
> My main question is : do you really want to transform this simple driver into
> a dirty multi-bus generic mailbox driver ?
> The meson_mhu is only 199 lines and this patch adds 181 lines to the arm_mhu driver.
>
> I'll personally push to have two separate drivers here.
>
It is a shame if we need to copy a driver only due to changed register
offsets. Let me give it a shot and see how worse off we would be.

Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-28 15:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-21 10:02 [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] scpi: Add SCPI registry to handle legacy protocol Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/9] mailbox: Add Amlogic Meson Message-Handling-Unit Neil Armstrong
2016-06-22  4:31   ` Jassi Brar
2016-06-23 12:50     ` Neil Armstrong
2016-06-23 15:46     ` Neil Armstrong
2016-06-25 17:50       ` Jassi Brar
2016-06-28 14:00         ` Neil Armstrong
2016-06-28 15:06           ` Jassi Brar [this message]
2016-07-04 15:25             ` Jassi Brar
2016-07-04 15:38   ` Jassi Brar
2016-07-06 13:17     ` Neil Armstrong
2016-07-07  4:27       ` Jassi Brar
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/9] dt-bindings: mailbox: Add Amlogic Meson MHU Bindings Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/9] ARM64: dts: meson-gxbb: Add Meson MHU Node Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/9] firmware: Add a SCPI registry to handle multiple implementations Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/9] firmware: scpi: Switch arm_scpi to use new registry Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/9] firmware: Add legacy SCPI protocol driver Neil Armstrong
2016-06-30 10:53   ` Sudeep Holla
2016-07-19  9:17     ` Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 7/9] dt-bindings: arm: Update arm,scpi bindings with Meson GXBB SCPI Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 8/9] ARM64: dts: meson-gxbb: Add SRAM node Neil Armstrong
2016-06-21 10:02 ` [RFC PATCH v2 9/9] ARM64: dts: meson-gxbb: Add SCPI with cpufreq & sensors Nodes Neil Armstrong
2016-06-22  2:54 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] scpi: Add SCPI registry to handle legacy protocol Frank Wang
2016-06-23 12:45   ` Neil Armstrong
2016-06-24  2:31     ` Frank Wang

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=CABb+yY3mD3chLtM02a5NvOO_HF2JAeu-SELkxzTxkkf5i+Bftg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jassisinghbrar@gmail.com \
    --cc=frank.wang@rock-chips.com \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
    --cc=linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=narmstrong@baylibre.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=wxt@rock-chips.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).