[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z72ydHCLxd-WGsJu@bogus>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 12:07:16 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@...c27.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/10] arm64: dts: Add Arm Morello support
Hi Mark,
Thanks for raising valid points/concerns.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 10:08:18AM +0000, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> Hello Mark,
>
> On 21/02/2025 18:54, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Hi Vincenzo,
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 06:03:39PM +0000, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> >> The Morello architecture is an experimental extension to Armv8.2-A,
> >> which extends the AArch64 state with the principles proposed in
> >> version 7 of the Capability Hardware Enhanced RISC Instructions
> >> (CHERI) ISA [1].
> >
> > None of the CHERI stuff is supported upstream, so from upstream's PoV
> > this is a low-volume dev-board/SoC with an experimental ARMv8.2-A CPU.
> >
I understand and agree with your concerns.
>
> Agreed, I have no plans to upstream Morello support beyond the device tree.
>
> >> This series adds dts support for the Arm Morello System Development
> >> Platform.
> >
> > Do we actually need the dts for this board?
> >
> > I have one on my desk; it boots vanilla Debian 12 via UEFI + ACPI just
> > fine, with the Debian 6.1.0-13-arm64 kernel.
> >
> > Is there something that we can only do with the DT? i.e. some
> > functionality that isn't exposed via ACPI?
> >
> > How do you expect this DT to be used?
> >
>
> There are functionalities that are not exposed via ACPI, e.g. gpu, dpu, i2c for
> the phy, etc. My aim to have upstream support for all the hardware exposed by
> the platform.
>
Does this address some of your concerns ? I do understand some of these
are not well addressed in ACPI and hence people use DT as an alternative.
> Note: This series contains only the basic infrastructure, the plan is add
> progressively more features in the future.
>
I was thinking of queuing this in -next if all the bindings are acked.
Let me know if you still have concerns and would like to avoid getting
these merged. I will hold off then.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists