[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 23:47:13 -0700
From: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"jason@...edaemon.net" <jason@...edaemon.net>,
"marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
"anup@...infault.org" <anup@...infault.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"shorne@...il.com" <shorne@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] RISC-V: Support per-hart timebase-frequency
On 8/6/18 1:34 PM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Aug 2018 05:33:57 PDT (-0700), Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 03:19:49PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
>>> On 8/2/18 4:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>>> From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
>>>>
>>>> Follow the updated DT specs and read the timebase-frequency from the
>>>> CPU 0 node.
>>>>
>>>
>>> However, the DT in the HighFive Unleashed has the entry at the wrong place.
>>>
>>> Even the example in github also at wrong place.
>>> https://github.com/riscv/riscv-device-tree-doc/pull/8/commits/2461d481329c55005fcbe684f0d6bdb3b7f0a432
>>>
>>> DT should be consistent between Documentation and the one in the hardware.
>>> I can fix them in bbl & submit a bbl patch. But I am not sure if that's an
>>> acceptable way to do it.
>>
>> I'll need to have comments from Palmer and/or someone else at SiFive
>> here. Personally I really don't care where we document the timebase,
>> as this patch supports both locations anywhere. For now I'll just update
>> the commit log to state that more explicitly.
>
> You're welcome to submit a BBL patch to make this all match, but from my
> understanding of the device tree spec putting timebase-frequency in either
> place should be legal so it's not a critical fix. That said, it's better to
> have them match than not match.
>
ok. I will add it my TODO list as a low priority task. Following DT
entries can be fixed for now.
1. timebase-frequency
2. next-level-cache
Regards,
Atish
Powered by blists - more mailing lists