On 2021-09-29 18:12, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 12:26 AM Sai Prakash Ranjan
<saiprakash.ranjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
System Cache Controller (Last Level Cache Controller/LLCC) does not
have a cache-level associated with it as enforced by the already
existing 'cache-controller' node name, so add system-cache-controller
to the list of generic node names as decided on the lkml in [1][2]
and already being used in the dts for sometime now.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5dcd8588.1c69fb81.2528a.3460@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1573814758.git.saiprakash.ranjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Cc: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst
b/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst
index 40be22192b2f..c06c5063c68b 100644
--- a/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst
+++ b/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst
@@ -276,6 +276,7 @@ name should be one of the following choices:
* sram-controller
* ssi-controller
* syscon
+ * system-cache-controller
I don't want to encourage others to use this over 'cache-controller'
and the standard binding.
Right, but why would others use this over cache-controller? This is
supposed
to be used only for last level cache controllers where there is no
cache-level
associated with it like in the system cache controller/LLCC found in QTI
SoCs.
Also you had acked the corresponding change in the DT binding for LLCC
[1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191203172235.GA18507@bogus/
Thanks,
Sai
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
