On 10/06/13 12:15, Michal Simek wrote:
Thankyou for your comments,
> Hi,
>
> hmm - that's a nice bug that thunderbird is not able to send this email. :-(
> Let's comment it again via gmail.
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih415.dtsi
> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih415.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..6dcf5b4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih415.dtsi
...
> +
> + soc {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> + interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
> + ranges;
> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>
>
>
> Rob and Grant: what's the purpose of SoC node.
> It seems to me odd that SoC is compatible with simple-bus.
All the drivers on this SOC are based on platform bus, so we use
simple-bus, here.
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih41x.dtsi
> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih41x.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..7321403
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih41x.dtsi
> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
> +/ {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> +
> + cpus {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> + cpu@0 {
> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
> + reg = <0>;
> + };
> + cpu@1 {
> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
> + reg = <1>;
> + };
> + };
> +
>
>
> I believe your SoC also has a bus here.
It does but there is no active driver to manage it.
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/board-dt.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
> +
> +void __init stih41x_l2x0_init(void)
> +{
> + u32 way_size = 0x4;
> + u32 aux_ctrl;
> +
> + aux_ctrl = (0x1 << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_SHARE_OVERRIDE_SHIFT) |
> + (0x1 << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_DATA_PREFETCH_SHIFT) |
> + (0x1 << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_INSTR_PREFETCH_SHIFT) |
> + (way_size << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_WAY_SIZE_SHIFT);
>
>
>
> #include <linux/bitops.h>
> Linus Walleij would write use BIT() here
I will use BIT() macro.
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/headsmp.S
> b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/headsmp.S
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..3dd5c04
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/headsmp.S
> @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
> +/*
> + * arch/arm/plat-stixxxx/headsmp.S
>
> + .long pen_release
>
>
> check that your SoC has no option to start/reset cpus separately.
> If yes, then you shouldn't use pen_release.
> We discussed this with Russel some days ago.
No, stih41x series can't reset the cores separately.
>
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/platsmp.c
> b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/platsmp.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..ffc40c0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/platsmp.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
> +/*
> + * arch/arm/plat-stixxxx/platsmp.c
>
>
> wrong.
Left over, will clean it up in next version.
> + * arch/arm/plat-stixxxx/platsmp.c
>
>
> incorrect.
Left over, will clean it up in next version.
>
> +extern struct smp_operations stixxxx_smp_ops;
> +extern void __iomem *stixxxx_scu_base_addr;
>
>
> Unused variable in this patch.
yes, I will remove stixxxx_scu_base_addr.
thanks,
srini
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
