[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAhSdy3_D9S0X1gHoPjHpfcpeEpVWdUa_HE_KYV3eXbB3eVhdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 12:06:07 +0530
From: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
To: Sean Anderson <seanga2@...il.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <anup.patel@....com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@....com>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] dt-bindings: timer: Add CLINT bindings
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 11:59 AM Sean Anderson <seanga2@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/22/20 1:54 AM, Anup Patel wrote:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 1:35 AM Sean Anderson <seanga2@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 5/21/20 9:45 AM, Anup Patel wrote:
> >>> +Required properties:
> >>> +- compatible : "sifive,clint-1.0.0" and a string identifying the actual
> >>> + detailed implementation in case that specific bugs need to be worked around.
> >>
> >> Should the "riscv,clint0" compatible string be documented here? This
> >
> > Yes, I forgot to add this compatible string. I will add in v2.
> >
> >> peripheral is not really specific to sifive, as it is present in most
> >> rocket-chip cores.
> >
> > I agree that CLINT is present in a lot of non-SiFive RISC-V SOCs and
> > FPGAs but this IP is only documented as part of SiFive FU540 SOC.
> > (Refer, https://static.dev.sifive.com/FU540-C000-v1.0.pdf)
> >
> > The RISC-V foundation should host the CLINT spec independently
> > under https://github.com/riscv and make CLINT spec totally open.
> >
> > For now, I have documented it just like PLIC DT bindings found at:
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/sifive,plic-1.0.0.txt
>
> The PLIC seems to have its own RISC-V-sponsored documentation [1] which
> was split off from the older privileged specs. By your logic above,
> should it be renamed to riscv,plic0.txt (with a corresponding change in
> the documented compatible strings)?
>
> [1] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-plic-spec
For PLIC bindings, we can certainly do the renaming because now
we have PLIC v1 specification hosted on RISC-V Foundation Github.
Regards,
Anup
Powered by blists - more mailing lists