[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140115102701.GA27314@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:27:01 +0000
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] devicetree: bindings: Document Krait CPU/L1 EDAC
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:30:32PM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> The Krait CPU/L1 error reporting device is made up a per-CPU
> interrupt. While we're here, document the next-level-cache
> property that's used by the Krait EDAC driver.
>
> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
> Cc: <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
> index 91304353eea4..c332b5168456 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
> @@ -191,6 +191,16 @@ nodes to be present and contain the properties described below.
> property identifying a 64-bit zero-initialised
> memory location.
>
> + - interrupts
> + Usage: required for cpus with compatible string "qcom,krait".
> + Value type: <prop-encoded-array>
> + Definition: L1/CPU error interrupt
I reckon you want this property to belong in the cpus node (example below),
not in cpu nodes, right ?
Are you relying on a platform device to be created for /cpus node in
order for this series to work ? I guess that's why you want the
interrupts property to be defined in /cpus so that it becomes a platform
device resource (and you also add a compatible property in /cpus that is
missing in these bindings).
> +
> + - next-level-cache
> + Usage: optional
> + Value type: <phandle>
> + Definition: phandle pointing to the next level cache
> +
> Example 1 (dual-cluster big.LITTLE system 32-bit):
>
> cpus {
> @@ -382,3 +392,45 @@ cpus {
> cpu-release-addr = <0 0x20000000>;
> };
> };
> +
> +
> +Example 5 (Krait 32-bit system):
> +
> +cpus {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> + interrupts = <1 9 0xf04>;
In patch 4 you also add a compatible property here, and that's not documented,
and honestly I do not think that's acceptable either. I guess you want a
compatible property here to match the platform driver, right ?
Thank you,
Lorenzo
> +
> + cpu@0 {
> + device_type = "cpu";
> + compatible = "qcom,krait";
> + reg = <0>;
> + next-level-cache = <&L2>;
> + };
> +
> + cpu@1 {
> + device_type = "cpu";
> + compatible = "qcom,krait";
> + reg = <1>;
> + next-level-cache = <&L2>;
> + };
> +
> + cpu@2 {
> + device_type = "cpu";
> + compatible = "qcom,krait";
> + reg = <2>;
> + next-level-cache = <&L2>;
> + };
> +
> + cpu@3 {
> + device_type = "cpu";
> + compatible = "qcom,krait";
> + reg = <3>;
> + next-level-cache = <&L2>;
> + };
> +
> + L2: l2-cache {
> + compatible = "cache";
> + interrupts = <0 2 0x4>;
> + };
> +};
> --
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> hosted by The Linux Foundation
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists