On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 19:45:57 +0800, Conor Dooley wrote:
> Hey Emil/Hal,
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 09:17:11AM +0800, Hal Feng wrote:
> > From: Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@xxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This adds support for the StarFive JH7110 SoC which also
> > features this SiFive cache controller.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@xxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Hal Feng <hal.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs | 1 +
> > drivers/soc/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/soc/sifive/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > drivers/soc/sifive/sifive_ccache.c | 1 +
> > 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs b/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs
> > index 69774bb362d6..5a40e05f8cab 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig.socs
> > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ config SOC_STARFIVE
> > bool "StarFive SoCs"
> > select PINCTRL
> > select RESET_CONTROLLER
> > + select SIFIVE_CCACHE
>
> Please no. I am trying to get rid of these selects + I cannot figure out
> why this driver is so important that you *need* to select it. Surely the
> SoC is useable without it>
> Is this a hang over from your vendor tree that uses the driver to do
> non-coherent stuff for the jh7100?
I have tested that the board can successfully boot up without the cache
driver. The `select` can be removed for JH7110. @Emil, what do you think
of this?
>
> > select SIFIVE_PLIC
> > help
> > This enables support for StarFive SoC platform hardware.
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile
> > index 69ba6508cf2c..534669840858 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile
> > @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ obj-y += qcom/
> > obj-y += renesas/
> > obj-y += rockchip/
> > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMSUNG) += samsung/
> > -obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SIFIVE) += sifive/
> > +obj-y += sifive/
>
> This bit is fine.
>
> > obj-y += sunxi/
> > obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/
> > obj-y += ti/
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/sifive/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/sifive/Kconfig
> > index ed4c571f8771..e86870be34c9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/sifive/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/sifive/Kconfig
> > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
> > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> >
> > -if SOC_SIFIVE
> > +if SOC_SIFIVE || SOC_STARFIVE
>
> As I suppose is this - but hardly scalable. I suppose it doesn't really
> matter.
>
> > config SIFIVE_CCACHE
> > bool "Sifive Composable Cache controller"
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/sifive/sifive_ccache.c b/drivers/soc/sifive/sifive_ccache.c
> > index 1c171150e878..9489d1a90fbc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/sifive/sifive_ccache.c
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/sifive/sifive_ccache.c
> > @@ -107,6 +107,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id sifive_ccache_ids[] = {
> > { .compatible = "sifive,fu540-c000-ccache" },
> > { .compatible = "sifive,fu740-c000-ccache" },
> > { .compatible = "sifive,ccache0" },
> > + { .compatible = "starfive,jh7110-ccache" },
>
> Per my second reply to the previous patch, I am not sure why you do not
> just have a fallback compatible in the binding/dt for the fu740 ccache
> since you appear to have identical configuration?
Yeah, I will use the compatible of fu740 and modify this patch.
Best regards,
Hal
