| Message ID | 1468723822-30457-5-git-send-email-oss@buserror.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a common > header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM chips as well as > PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise > need to ifdef the header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > [scottwood: update description] > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of devices, use that instead. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a common > > header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM chips as well as > > PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise > > need to ifdef the header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > [scottwood: update description] > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor specific > way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device infrastructure > to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of devices, use that > instead. As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are you NACKing this? -Scott -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 1:31:48 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a common > > > header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM chips as well as > > > PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise > > > need to ifdef the header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor specific > > way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device infrastructure > > to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of devices, use that > > instead. > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are you NACKing > this? I don't know why that's important, but I suggested the creation of drivers/soc/ as a place to have a more general place for platform specific drivers as part of being maintainer for arm-soc, and almost all changes to drivers/soc go through our tree. Olof does about half the merges, but I do the majority of the reviews for drivers/soc patches. See also git log --graph --format="%an %s" --merges drivers/soc/ Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a common > > > header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM chips as well as > > > PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise > > > need to ifdef the header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor specific > > way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device infrastructure > > to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of devices, use that > > instead. > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are you NACKing > this? I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a common > > > > header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM chips as well > > > > as > > > > PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch drivers would > > > > otherwise > > > > need to ifdef the header inclusion and all references to the SVR > > > > symbols. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor specific > > > way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device infrastructure > > > to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of devices, use that > > > instead. > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are you > > NACKing > > this? > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. OK, I've pulled these patches out. For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the issue if/when we need to do something similar on an ARM chip. -Scott [1] One of the issues with Arnd's approach is that it wouldn't have worked for early things like the clock driver, and he didn't seem to mind using ifdef and mfspr() there. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thursday, July 21, 2016 11:45:26 AM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like > the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the issue if/when we need to do > something similar on an ARM chip. That sounds ok to me. having an mfspr check isn't nice but does the job to work around existing bindings. For future chips, we can hopefully find a way to identify most quirks early enough that the DT binding can describe them using distinct compatible strings or other properties, if necessary with the help of the boot loader. Some other folks on MIPS were interested in having the soc_device matching infrastructure and contacted me off-list, but they can of course take the patch I sent and work from that. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Scott, > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:45 AM > To: Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Yangbo Lu > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > include/linux/fsl > > On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a > > > > > common header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM > > > > > chips as well as PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch > > > > > drivers would otherwise need to ifdef the header inclusion and > > > > > all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor > > > > specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device > > > > infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of > > > > devices, use that instead. > > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are you > > > NACKing this? > > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. > > OK, I've pulled these patches out. > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR) > like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the issue if/when we > need to do something similar on an ARM chip. [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I remembered that Uffe had opposed us to introduce non-generic header files(like '#include <asm/mpc85xx.h>') in mmc driver initially. So I think it will not be accepted to use ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)... And this method still couldn’t get SVR of ARM chip now. Any other suggestion here? Thank you very much. - Yangbo Lu > > -Scott > > [1] One of the issues with Arnd's approach is that it wouldn't have > worked for early things like the clock driver, and he didn't seem to mind > using ifdef and > mfspr() there.
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 06:12 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > Hi Scott, > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:45 AM > > To: Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann > > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Yangbo Lu > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > include/linux/fsl > > > > On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h as a > > > > > > common header file. This SVR numberspace is used on some ARM > > > > > > chips as well as PPC, and even to check for a PPC SVR multi-arch > > > > > > drivers would otherwise need to ifdef the header inclusion and > > > > > > all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor > > > > > specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device > > > > > infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a table of > > > > > devices, use that instead. > > > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are you > > > > NACKing this? > > > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. > > OK, I've pulled these patches out. > > > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR) > > like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the issue if/when we > > need to do something similar on an ARM chip. > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I remembered that Uffe had opposed us to introduce non- > generic header files(like '#include <asm/mpc85xx.h>') > in mmc driver initially. So I think it will not be accepted to use ifdef > CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)... > And this method still couldn’t get SVR of ARM chip now. Right, as I said we'll have to revisit the issue if/when we have the same problem on an ARM chip. That also applies if the PPC ifdef is still getting NACKed from the MMC side. > Any other suggestion here? The other option is to try to come up with something that fits into Arnd's framework while addressing the concerns I raised. The soc_id string should be well-structured to avoid mismatches and compatibility problems (especially since it would get exposed to userspace). Maybe something like: svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, with the final comma used so that globs can put a colon on either end to be sure they're matching a full field. The SoC die name would be the primary chip for a given die (e.g. p4040 would have a die name of p4080). The "name" and "die" fields would never include the trailing "e" indicated by the E bit. Extra tags could be used for common groupings, such as all chips from a particular die before a certain revision. Once a tag is added it can't be removed or reordered, to maintain userspace compatibility, but new tags could be appended. Some examples: svr:0x82000020,svre:0x82000020,name:p4080,die:p4080,rev:2.0, svr:0x82000020,svr e:0x82080020,name:p4080,die:p4080,rev:2.0, svr:0x82000030,svre:0x82000030,name: p4080,die:p4080,rev:3.0, svr:0x82000030,svre:0x82080030,name:p4080,die:p4080,re v:3.0, svr:0x82010020,svre:0x82010020,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:2.0, svr:0x820100 20,svre:0x82090020,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:2.0, svr:0x82010030,svre:0x82010030 ,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:3.0, svr:0x82010030,svre:0x82090030,name:p4040,die:p4 080,rev:3.0, Then if you want to apply a workaround on: - all chips using the p4080 die, match with "*,die:p4080,*" - all chips using the rev 2.0 p4080 die, match with "*,die:p4080,rev:2.0,*" - Only p4040, but of any rev, match with "*,name:p4040,*" Matching via open-coded hex number should be considered a last resort (it's more error-prone, either for getting the number wrong or for forgetting variants -- the latter is already a common problem), but preferable to adding too many tags. Using wildcards within a tag field would be discouraged. -Scott -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Scott, > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 8:38 AM > To: Yangbo Lu; Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann; Ulf Hansson > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > include/linux/fsl > > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 06:12 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:45 AM > > > To: Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann > > > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > > > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Yangbo Lu > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > > include/linux/fsl > > > > > > On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h > > > > > > > as a common header file. This SVR numberspace is used on > > > > > > > some ARM chips as well as PPC, and even to check for a PPC > > > > > > > SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise need to ifdef the > > > > > > > header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor > > > > > > specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device > > > > > > infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a table > > > > > > of devices, use that instead. > > > > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are > > > > > you NACKing this? > > > > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. > > > OK, I've pulled these patches out. > > > > > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and > > > mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the > > > issue if/when we need to do something similar on an ARM chip. > > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I remembered that Uffe had opposed us to introduce > > non- generic header files(like '#include <asm/mpc85xx.h>') in mmc > > driver initially. So I think it will not be accepted to use ifdef > > CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)... > > And this method still couldn’t get SVR of ARM chip now. > > Right, as I said we'll have to revisit the issue if/when we have the same > problem on an ARM chip. That also applies if the PPC ifdef is still > getting NACKed from the MMC side. [Lu Yangbo-B47093] It's not clear for me about your idea :( Do you mean we can still use this method, or not ? I think Uffe had opposed to use ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR). Is there any solution to resolve ? :) > > > Any other suggestion here? > > The other option is to try to come up with something that fits into > Arnd's framework while addressing the concerns I raised. The soc_id > string should be well-structured to avoid mismatches and compatibility > problems (especially since it would get exposed to userspace). Maybe > something like: > > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, [Lu Yangbo-B47093] The soc_device_attribut struct is defined as below. struct soc_device_attribute { const char *machine; const char *family; const char *revision; const char *soc_id; }; We can put the 'model' in root node of dts as machine, put 'Freescale QorIQ' as family, and put x.x as revision. Is it ok? As you suggested, you like to use below string as soc_id. It's easy to get svr, but how does the software know the name and die, and put them into this string ? It's a large code to define them. > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, Should we remove rev here since there is also a revision member? Regarding the guts_init, we still call guts_init and then match the soc, or we change to use platform driver? Or do you know any better place to call guts_init to initialize only once? Thank you so much :) > > with the final comma used so that globs can put a colon on either end to > be sure they're matching a full field. The SoC die name would be the > primary chip for a given die (e.g. p4040 would have a die name of > p4080). The "name" > and "die" fields would never include the trailing "e" indicated by the E > bit. > > Extra tags could be used for common groupings, such as all chips from a > particular die before a certain revision. Once a tag is added it can't > be removed or reordered, to maintain userspace compatibility, but new > tags could be appended. > > Some examples: > > svr:0x82000020,svre:0x82000020,name:p4080,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > svr:0x82000020,svr > e:0x82080020,name:p4080,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > svr:0x82000030,svre:0x82000030,name: > p4080,die:p4080,rev:3.0, > svr:0x82000030,svre:0x82080030,name:p4080,die:p4080,re > v:3.0, > svr:0x82010020,svre:0x82010020,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > svr:0x820100 > 20,svre:0x82090020,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > > svr:0x82010030,svre:0x82010030 > ,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:3.0, > svr:0x82010030,svre:0x82090030,name:p4040,die:p4 > 080,rev:3.0, > > Then if you want to apply a workaround on: > - all chips using the p4080 die, match with "*,die:p4080,*" > - all chips using the rev 2.0 p4080 die, match with > "*,die:p4080,rev:2.0,*" > - Only p4040, but of any rev, match with "*,name:p4040,*" > > Matching via open-coded hex number should be considered a last resort > (it's more error-prone, either for getting the number wrong or for > forgetting variants -- the latter is already a common problem), but > preferable to adding too many tags. > > Using wildcards within a tag field would be discouraged. > > -Scott
On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 05:57 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > Hi Scott, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 8:38 AM > > To: Yangbo Lu; Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann; Ulf Hansson > > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > include/linux/fsl > > > > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 06:12 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > > > > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > > > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:45 AM > > > > To: Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann > > > > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > > > > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Yangbo Lu > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > > > include/linux/fsl > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h > > > > > > > > as a common header file. This SVR numberspace is used on > > > > > > > > some ARM chips as well as PPC, and even to check for a PPC > > > > > > > > SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise need to ifdef the > > > > > > > > header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > > > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor > > > > > > > specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device > > > > > > > infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a table > > > > > > > of devices, use that instead. > > > > > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are > > > > > > you NACKing this? > > > > > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. > > > > OK, I've pulled these patches out. > > > > > > > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and > > > > mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the > > > > issue if/when we need to do something similar on an ARM chip. > > > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I remembered that Uffe had opposed us to introduce > > > non- generic header files(like '#include <asm/mpc85xx.h>') in mmc > > > driver initially. So I think it will not be accepted to use ifdef > > > CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)... > > > And this method still couldn’t get SVR of ARM chip now. > > Right, as I said we'll have to revisit the issue if/when we have the same > > problem on an ARM chip. That also applies if the PPC ifdef is still > > getting NACKed from the MMC side. > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] It's not clear for me about your idea :( > Do you mean we can still use this method, or not ? > I think Uffe had opposed to use ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR). > Is there any solution to resolve ? > :) As I said, I'm OK with using the SPR. It's up to you to find out whether it's still unacceptable with the MMC maintainers given all the discussion (it would be the quickest way to get the workaround enabled), or just go with the method below. > > > Any other suggestion here? > > The other option is to try to come up with something that fits into > > Arnd's framework while addressing the concerns I raised. The soc_id > > string should be well-structured to avoid mismatches and compatibility > > problems (especially since it would get exposed to userspace). Maybe > > something like: > > > > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] The soc_device_attribut struct is defined as below. > struct soc_device_attribute { > const char *machine; > const char *family; > const char *revision; > const char *soc_id; > }; > > We can put the 'model' in root node of dts as machine, put 'Freescale QorIQ' > as family, I'd just put "QorIQ" to avoid the question of whether to use "Freescale" or "NXP". > and put x.x as revision. Is it ok? > As you suggested, you like to use below string as soc_id. It's easy to get > svr, but how does the software know the name and die, > and put them into this string ? It's a large code to define them. Yes, there would need to be a table in the guts driver for each SVR. If the SVR isn't found in the table then the soc_id would only contain the svr: and svre: fields. > > > > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, > Should we remove rev here since there is also a revision member? Yes, I forgot there was a revision field -- it should go there obviously. > Regarding the guts_init, we still call guts_init and then match the soc, or > we change to use platform driver? > Or do you know any better place to call guts_init to initialize only once? Use a platform driver for now. If we ever need to check an ARM SVR in the clock driver or similar place, then Arnd can explain what he wants us to do then :-) -Scott -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Uffe, > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 5:41 AM > To: Yangbo Lu; Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann; Ulf Hansson > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Xiaobo Xie > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > include/linux/fsl > > On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 05:57 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 8:38 AM > > > To: Yangbo Lu; Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann; Ulf Hansson > > > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc- > > > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > > include/linux/fsl > > > > > > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 06:12 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@buserror.net] > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:45 AM > > > > > To: Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann > > > > > Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; > > > > > linuxppc- dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > > > > Yangbo Lu > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > > > > include/linux/fsl > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to > > > > > > > > > svr.h as a common header file. This SVR numberspace is > > > > > > > > > used on some ARM chips as well as PPC, and even to check > > > > > > > > > for a PPC SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise need to > > > > > > > > > ifdef the header inclusion and all references to the SVR > symbols. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com> > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> > > > > > > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another > > > > > > > > vendor specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device > > > > > > > > infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a > > > > > > > > table of devices, use that instead. > > > > > > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity > > > > > > > are you NACKing this? > > > > > > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. > > > > > OK, I've pulled these patches out. > > > > > > > > > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and > > > > > mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit > > > > > the issue if/when we need to do something similar on an ARM chip. > > > > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I remembered that Uffe had opposed us to > > > > introduce > > > > non- generic header files(like '#include <asm/mpc85xx.h>') in mmc > > > > driver initially. So I think it will not be accepted to use ifdef > > > > CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)... > > > > And this method still couldn’t get SVR of ARM chip now. > > > Right, as I said we'll have to revisit the issue if/when we have the > > > same problem on an ARM chip. That also applies if the PPC ifdef is > > > still getting NACKed from the MMC side. > > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] It's not clear for me about your idea :( Do you > > mean we can still use this method, or not ? > > I think Uffe had opposed to use ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR). > > Is there any solution to resolve ? > > :) > > As I said, I'm OK with using the SPR. It's up to you to find out whether > it's still unacceptable with the MMC maintainers given all the discussion > (it would be the quickest way to get the workaround enabled), or just go > with the method below. [Lu Yangbo-B47093] As you know, this patchset(as below) has been discussed for more than one year. What I want is just to add a fix for an specific soc revision. Yangbo Lu (7): Documentation: DT: update Freescale DCFG compatible ARM64: dts: ls2080a: add device configuration node soc: fsl: add GUTS driver for QorIQ platforms dt: move guts devicetree doc out of powerpc directory powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl MAINTAINERS: add entry for Freescale SoC drivers mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: fix host version for T4240-R1.0-R2.0 But we have to abandon it since Arnd strongly disagree our guts driver method to get soc revision. Now I have to ask you to reconsider the original method to get soc revison since we really have no better idea. As Scott suggested above, use ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like the clock driver does to get SVR. It's quickest way to resolve our esdhc issue. Could you reconsider to use this? Although Arnd provided another new method by sending a proof-of-concept patch as below, there were still many controversial points. I'm worried that would be discussed for a quite long time like the guts driver. [PATCH 1/4] base: soc: introduce soc_device_match() interface [PATCH 2/4] soc: fsl: add GUTS driver for QorIQ platforms [PATCH 3/4] mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: fix host version for T4240-R1.0-R2.0 [PATCH 4/4] Revert "powerpc/fsl: Move fsl_guts.h out of arch/powerpc" Anyway, what I want is just to fix the esdhc issue ASAP. Uffe, Could you reconsider whether you could accept the way using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)? Or do you have any suggestion. I will appreciate your suggestion. Thanks a lot. - Yangbo > > > > > Any other suggestion here? > > > The other option is to try to come up with something that fits into > > > Arnd's framework while addressing the concerns I raised. The soc_id > > > string should be well-structured to avoid mismatches and > > > compatibility problems (especially since it would get exposed to > > > userspace). Maybe something like: > > > > > > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > > > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, > > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] The soc_device_attribut struct is defined as below. > > struct soc_device_attribute { > > const char *machine; > > const char *family; > > const char *revision; > > const char *soc_id; > > }; > > > > We can put the 'model' in root node of dts as machine, put 'Freescale > QorIQ' > > as family, > > I'd just put "QorIQ" to avoid the question of whether to use "Freescale" > or "NXP". > > > and put x.x as revision. Is it ok? > > As you suggested, you like to use below string as soc_id. It's easy to > > get svr, but how does the software know the name and die, and put them > > into this string ? It's a large code to define them. > > Yes, there would need to be a table in the guts driver for each SVR. If > the SVR isn't found in the table then the soc_id would only contain the > svr: and > svre: fields. > > > > > > > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > > > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, > > Should we remove rev here since there is also a revision member? > > Yes, I forgot there was a revision field -- it should go there obviously. > > > Regarding the guts_init, we still call guts_init and then match the > > soc, or we change to use platform driver? > > Or do you know any better place to call guts_init to initialize only > once? > > Use a platform driver for now. If we ever need to check an ARM SVR in > the clock driver or similar place, then Arnd can explain what he wants us > to do then :-) > > -Scott
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S index 462aed9..2b0284e 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S @@ -13,13 +13,13 @@ * */ +#include <linux/fsl/svr.h> #include <asm/page.h> #include <asm/processor.h> #include <asm/cputable.h> #include <asm/ppc_asm.h> #include <asm/mmu-book3e.h> #include <asm/asm-offsets.h> -#include <asm/mpc85xx.h> _GLOBAL(__e500_icache_setup) mfspr r0, SPRN_L1CSR1 diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c index 0ef9df4..0fd1895 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ #include <linux/delay.h> #include <linux/string.h> #include <linux/fsl/edac.h> +#include <linux/fsl/svr.h> #include <linux/init.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> #include <linux/memblock.h> @@ -37,7 +38,6 @@ #include <asm/pci-bridge.h> #include <asm/ppc-pci.h> #include <asm/machdep.h> -#include <asm/mpc85xx.h> #include <asm/disassemble.h> #include <asm/ppc-opcode.h> #include <sysdev/fsl_soc.h> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c b/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c index 58566a17..4b6c438 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ #include <linux/clk.h> #include <linux/clk-provider.h> #include <linux/fsl/guts.h> +#include <linux/fsl/svr.h> #include <linux/io.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/module.h> @@ -1149,8 +1150,6 @@ bad_args: } #ifdef CONFIG_PPC -#include <asm/mpc85xx.h> - static const u32 a4510_svrs[] __initconst = { (SVR_P2040 << 8) | 0x10, /* P2040 1.0 */ (SVR_P2040 << 8) | 0x11, /* P2040 1.1 */ diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c index 48ecffe..600704c 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c @@ -27,9 +27,9 @@ #include <linux/i2c.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> #include <linux/delay.h> +#include <linux/fsl/svr.h> #include <asm/mpc52xx.h> -#include <asm/mpc85xx.h> #include <sysdev/fsl_soc.h> #define DRV_NAME "mpc-i2c" diff --git a/drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c b/drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c index a34355f..af8fb27 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c @@ -21,11 +21,10 @@ #include "fsl_pamu.h" #include <linux/fsl/guts.h> +#include <linux/fsl/svr.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> #include <linux/genalloc.h> -#include <asm/mpc85xx.h> - /* define indexes for each operation mapping scenario */ #define OMI_QMAN 0x00 #define OMI_FMAN 0x01 diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c index 2e6785b..450d31f 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c @@ -86,11 +86,11 @@ #include <linux/udp.h> #include <linux/in.h> #include <linux/net_tstamp.h> +#include <linux/fsl/svr.h> #include <asm/io.h> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC #include <asm/reg.h> -#include <asm/mpc85xx.h> #endif #include <asm/irq.h> #include <asm/uaccess.h> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mpc85xx.h b/include/linux/fsl/svr.h similarity index 97% rename from arch/powerpc/include/asm/mpc85xx.h rename to include/linux/fsl/svr.h index 213f3a8..8d13836 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mpc85xx.h +++ b/include/linux/fsl/svr.h @@ -9,8 +9,8 @@ * (at your option) any later version. */ -#ifndef __ASM_PPC_MPC85XX_H -#define __ASM_PPC_MPC85XX_H +#ifndef FSL_SVR_H +#define FSL_SVR_H #define SVR_REV(svr) ((svr) & 0xFF) /* SOC design resision */ #define SVR_MAJ(svr) (((svr) >> 4) & 0xF) /* Major revision field*/