Hi Jiaxun, > 在2024年10月29日十月 下午4:11，Jiaxun Yang写道： >> 在2024年10月29日十月 下午12:21，Aleksandar Rikalo写道： >> [...] >>> >>>> Is this property applicable for all MIPS vendors? There is no vendor >>>> prefix here, so this is generic for this architecture, right? >> >> I'd say the best vendor prefix is mti in this case. >> >> CM3 IP block is supplied by MIPS Technology, it is not a part of MIPS >> architecture spec. > > I just tried to revise this problem and I think a better approach would > be picking my CM binding [1] patch and add this as a property to CM binding. > > You don't need to pick rest of that series, this binding alone is sufficient, > and it's already being reviewed. > > Thanks > [1]: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240612-cm_probe-v2-5-a5b55440563c@xxxxxxxxxxx/ I had a look at your series and it seems that all the issues raised were solved, so why wasn't it merged? Regarding the binding in particular: If we add the property "cm3-l2-config-hci-broken", then it should be optional. However, the reg property also should be optional. Indeed, if we can detect the CM address, we shouldn't use a reg property. If we go in this direction, not only will the binding be modified but also code in arch/mips/kernel/mips-cm.c to handle this new property and manage the case where the reg is not needed. Additionally, we'll need to modify code in arch/mips/kernel/smp-cps.c to retrieve information about the HCI. I can write a series to illustrate it, if needed. Gregory >> >> Thanks >> -- >> - Jiaxun > > -- > - Jiaxun -- Grégory CLEMENT, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
