Hi Rob, On 09/08/2016 11:50 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 04:45:45PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote: >> On 08/12/2016 05:42 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>> On Fri 12 Aug 11:34 PDT 2016, Rob Herring wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 10:37:02AM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>>>> This documents the generic properties "rprocs" and "rproc-names", used >>>>> for consumer drivers to reference a remoteproc node. >>>> >>>> How do you intend to use this? I wonder if it would not be better to >>>> expose a remote proc with existing bindings for a particular purpose >>>> (e.g. clocks, resets, etc.) rather than a generic connection. The client >>>> side would have to have specific knowledge as to what functions the >>>> remote proc provides. >>>> >>> >>> The remoteproc node represents the mechanism and resources needed to >>> control the life cycle a co-processor, e.g. loading, booting, shutting >>> gown a video encoder/decoder. >>> >>> The proposed reference allows a separate thingie to assert control of >>> the life cycle of that co-processor. >>> >>> >>> I acknowledge that in some cases there is a fine line between what is >>> the life cycle management and what is the actual functionality >>> implemented by that remote processor. But as the remoteproc mechanism is >>> reusable between various use cases I think it makes sense to not describe >>> them as one unit. >> >> What's the current state of this patch, not officially acked yet right? > > Bjorn and I have discussed some, but probably needs more discussion. > This binding alone is simple enough, but I want to understand better how > it will be used and digesting all the QCom h/w is not simple. OK, thanks. The binding has no bearing on Qcom h/w though. > >> While we are at this, can we agree upon an alias stem name as well, we >> can stick to "rproc". Otherwise, I can submit an incremental patch on >> top of this along with the code that adds an API to retrieve it for >> client users. > > Any alias for this will be NAKed. My position on aliases is well > documented. Hmm, I don't have the complete background/history on your stance. I do have a need for identifying an exact remoteproc instance. How do you propose I do that without aliases, and without adding a non-hw related property to the DTS node? Like for example, we have 8 identical DSPs on Keystone 2 Hawking SoCs, and I need to construct a firmware name based on the instance id, and I cannot do this based on probe order. regards Suman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
