Re: [PATCH 02/11] devicetree: bindings: Document Qualcomm cpus and enable-method

[Kumar Gala]

On Nov 4, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:

> On 11/01, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> From: Rohit Vaswani <rvaswani@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> 
>>> Scorpion and Krait are Qualcomm cpus. These cpus don't use the
>>> spin-table enable-method. Instead they rely on mmio register
>>> accesses to enable power and clocks to bring CPUs out of reset.
>>> 
>>> Cc: <devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rohit Vaswani <rvaswani@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> [sboyd: Split off into separate patch, renamed method to
>>> qcom,mmio]
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> 
>>> This slightly conflicts with my krait EDAC series.
>>> 
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>>> index 37258f9..e2969fa2 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt
>>> @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ For the ARM architecture every CPU node must contain the following properties:
>>>                "marvell,mohawk"
>>>                "marvell,xsc3"
>>>                "marvell,xscale"
>>> +               "qcom,scorpion"
>>> +               "qcom,krait"
>>> 
>>> And the following optional properties:
>>> 
>>> @@ -52,6 +54,7 @@ And the following optional properties:
>>>                 different types of cpus.
>>>                 This should be one of:
>>>                 "spin-table"
>>> +                "qcom,mmio"
>> 
>> Not exactly specific. How would you handle variations in the enable
>> method? The mmio method to enable is tied to the core type or SOC
>> type?
> 
> Variations in the enable method are handled by searching for
> another node with different compatible strings. Later on in this
> series you'll see that we search for gcc-8660, kpss-acc-v1, or
> kpps-acc-v2. Once we find one of these nodes we perform the
> correct cold boot routine.
> 
> I'm actually considering renaming this to "qcom,cold-boot". We
> could further extend the enable-metho property to allow
> "qcom,warm-boot" and then for cases like kexec we could make the
> enable method be warm boot and our smp code could be smart enough
> to know to skip the whole cold boot sequence.


I think this should be more specific than just 'qcom,mmio' or 'qcom,warm-boot'.  It should be 'qcom,kpss-acc-v1' or 'qcom-gcc-8660'.

- k

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/