[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6dec8b28-5e6e-b53b-6351-aaa797d9078d@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 08:41:59 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: wangseok.lee@...sung.com,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"kishon@...com" <kishon@...com>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"jesper.nilsson@...s.com" <jesper.nilsson@...s.com>,
"lars.persson@...s.com" <lars.persson@...s.com>
Cc: "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"lorenzo.pieralisi@....com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
"kw@...ux.com" <kw@...ux.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...s.com" <linux-arm-kernel@...s.com>,
"kernel@...s.com" <kernel@...s.com>,
전문기 <moonki.jun@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver
On 29/03/2022 05:49, 이왕석 wrote:
>> --------- Original Message ---------
>> Sender : Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>> Date : 2022-03-28 20:44 (GMT+9)
>> Title : Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver
>>
>> On 28/03/2022 13:29, 이왕석 wrote:
>>>> --------- Original Message ---------
>>>> Sender : Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>>>> Date : 2022-03-28 18:38 (GMT+9)
>>>> Title : Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver
>>>>
>>>> On 28/03/2022 11:02, 이왕석 wrote:
>>>>>> --------- Original Message ---------
>>>>>> Sender : Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>>>>>> Date : 2022-03-28 16:12 (GMT+9)
>>>>>> Title : Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28/03/2022 03:44, 이왕석 wrote:
>>>>>>> This series patches include newly PCIe support for Axis ARTPEC-8 SoC.
>>>>>>> ARTPEC-8 is the SoC platform of Axis Communications.
>>>>>>> PCIe controller driver and phy driver have been newly added.
>>>>>>> There is also a new MAINTAINER in the addition of phy driver.
>>>>>>> PCIe controller is designed based on Design-Ware PCIe controller IP
>>>>>>> and PCIe phy is desinged based on SAMSUNG PHY IP.
>>>>>>> It also includes modifications to the Design-Ware controller driver to
>>>>>>> run the 64bit-based ARTPEC-8 PCIe controller driver.
>>>>>>> It consists of 6 patches in total.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This series has been tested on AXIS SW bring-up board
>>>>>>> with ARTPEC-8 chipset.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You lost mail threading. This makes reading this difficult for us. Plus
>>>>>> you sent something non-applicable (patch #2), so please resend.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Knowing recent Samsung reluctance to extend existing drivers and always
>>>>>> duplicate, please provide description/analysis why this driver cannot be
>>>>>> combined with existing driver. The answer like: we need several syscon
>>>>>> because we do not implement other frameworks (like interconnect) are not
>>>>>> valid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello, Krzysztof
>>>>> Thanks for your review.
>>>>>
>>>>> patch#2 was sent to the wrong format so sent again.
>>>>> Sorry for causing confusion.
>>>>
>>>> The first sending was HTML. Second was broken text, so still not working.
>>>>
>>>> Please resend everything with proper threading.
>>>
>>> Hello, Krzysztof
>>>
>>> I sent patch#2 three times.
>>> due to the influence of the email system,
>>> there was something wrong with the first and second mails.
>>> Sorry for causing confusion.
>>> Did you receive the third patch i sent you?
>>
>> Maybe, I don't know. It's not threaded so it's difficult to find it
>> among other 100 emails...
>
> I think you also received a normal patch# 2.
>
>>>
>>>>> This patch is specialized in Artpec-8,
>>>>> the SoC Platform of Axis Communication, and is newly applied.
>>>>> Since the target SoC platform is different from the driver previously
>>>>> used by Samsung, it is difficult to merge with the existing driver.
>>>>
>>>> Recently I always saw such answers and sometimes it was true, sometimes
>>>> not. What is exactly different?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>>> The main reason this patch should be added is that
>>> this patch is not the driver applied to exynos platform.
>>
>> Still this does not explain why you need separate driver.
>
> PCIe driver of artpec-8 is not available in exynos platform.
> because the PCIe of artpec and exynos have very different
> hardware in SoC design.
> Not only it is the SoC different,
> but the hardware design of PCIe is also different.
> Therefore, we are using driver's compatible
> as axis, artpec8-pcie rather than samsung, artpec8-pcie.
You keep repeating the same over and over. What is different? Drivers
can support different devices, I already wrote it. Just because device
is different does not mean it should have separate driver.
>
>>> Because the SoC platform is different,
>>> the IP configuration of PCIe is also different.
>>
>> What is exactly different? Usually drivers can support IP blocks with
>> some differences...
>>
>>> We will organize a driver for Artpec-8 platform and
>>> if there is no special reason, maintain this
>>> without adding it from the next series.
>>
>> I don't understand this.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>
> Also, as you know,
> exynos driver is designed according to exynos SoC platform,
> so both function and variable names start with exynos.
That's hardly a problem...
> Compared to the existing exynos driver,
> you can see that the structure and type of function are different.
No, I cannot see it. You coded the driver that way, you can code it in
other way.
> For this reason, it is difficult to use the existing exynos driver
> for artpec.
Naming of functions and structures is not making it difficult. That's
not the reason.
> Our idea is to register a new PCIe driver for artpec-8 SoC platform
> and maintain it in the future.
We also want to maintain Exynos PCIe driver in the future.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists