On 17/02/2023 11:12, Binbin Zhou wrote: > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 4:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 17/02/2023 07:09, Binbin Zhou wrote: >> >>>>> Hi Krzysztof: >>>>> >>>>> Allow me to give a brief overview of the current status of eiointc (DT-based): >>>>> Loongson-3A series supports eiointc; >>>>> Loongson-2K1000 does not support eiointc now; >>>>> Loongson-2K0500 supports eiointc, with differences from >>>>> Loongson-3, e.g. only up to 128 devices are supported; >>>>> Loongson-2K2000 supports eiointc, similar to Loongson-3. >>>>> .... >>>>> >>>>> As can be seen, there is now a bit of confusion in the chip's design of eiointc. >>>>> >>>>> The design of eiointc is probably refined step by step with the chip. >>>>> The same version of eiointc can be used for multiple chips, and the >>>>> same chip series may also use different versions of eiointc. Low-end >>>>> chips may use eiointc-2.0, and high-end chips may use eiointc-1.0, >>>>> depending on the time it's produced. >>>>> >>>>> So in the Loongson-2K series I have defined the current state as >>>>> eiointc-1.0, using the dts property to indicate the maximum number of >>>>> devices supported by eiointc that can be used directly in the driver. >>>>> >>>>> If there are new changes to the design later on, such as the >>>>> definition of registers, we can call it eiointc-2.0, which can also >>>>> cover more than one chip. >>>> >>>> Just go with SoC-based compatibles. If your version is not specific >>>> enough, then it is not a good way to represent the hardware. >>>> >>> >>> Hi Krzysztof: >>> >>> I have tried to write the following SoC-based compatibles, is it fine? >>> >>> compatible: >>> enum: >>> - loongson,ls3a-eiointc # For MIPS Loongson-3A if necessary. >>> - loongson,ls2k0500-eiointc >>> - loongson,ls2k200-eiointc >> >> Looks good, but didn't you state these are compatible between each >> other? I have impression there is a common set, so maybe one compatible >> work on other device with reduced number of devices? >> > > So far, the difference between ls2k SOCs is the number of devices > supported by eiointc. > > Do you mean use unified compatible and reuse loongson,eio-num-vecs? > > Would this be possible, e.g. No. I meant that maybe all these three should have been made compatible. Best regards, Krzysztof
