Hi Scott, > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 8:38 AM > To: Yangbo Lu; Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann; Ulf Hansson > Cc: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc- > dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > include/linux/fsl > > On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 06:12 +0000, Yangbo Lu wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:45 AM > > > To: Michael Ellerman; Arnd Bergmann > > > Cc: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc- > > > dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yangbo Lu > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] powerpc/fsl: move mpc85xx.h to > > > include/linux/fsl > > > > > > On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 20:26 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-21 04:31:48) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 13:24 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:50:21 PM CEST Scott Wood wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Move mpc85xx.h to include/linux/fsl and rename it to svr.h > > > > > > > as a common header file. This SVR numberspace is used on > > > > > > > some ARM chips as well as PPC, and even to check for a PPC > > > > > > > SVR multi-arch drivers would otherwise need to ifdef the > > > > > > > header inclusion and all references to the SVR symbols. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Acked-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > > [scottwood: update description] > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > > As discussed before, please don't introduce yet another vendor > > > > > > specific way to match a SoC ID from a device driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've posted a patch for an extension to the soc_device > > > > > > infrastructure to allow comparing the running SoC to a table > > > > > > of devices, use that instead. > > > > > As I asked before, in which relevant maintainership capacity are > > > > > you NACKing this? > > > > I'll nack the powerpc part until you guys can agree. > > > OK, I've pulled these patches out. > > > > > > For the MMC issue I suggest using ifdef CONFIG_PPC and > > > mfspr(SPRN_SVR) like the clock driver does[1] and we can revisit the > > > issue if/when we need to do something similar on an ARM chip. > > [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I remembered that Uffe had opposed us to introduce > > non- generic header files(like '#include <asm/mpc85xx.h>') in mmc > > driver initially. So I think it will not be accepted to use ifdef > > CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR)... > > And this method still couldn’t get SVR of ARM chip now. > > Right, as I said we'll have to revisit the issue if/when we have the same > problem on an ARM chip. That also applies if the PPC ifdef is still > getting NACKed from the MMC side. [Lu Yangbo-B47093] It's not clear for me about your idea :( Do you mean we can still use this method, or not ? I think Uffe had opposed to use ifdef CONFIG_PPC and mfspr(SPRN_SVR). Is there any solution to resolve ? :) > > > Any other suggestion here? > > The other option is to try to come up with something that fits into > Arnd's framework while addressing the concerns I raised. The soc_id > string should be well-structured to avoid mismatches and compatibility > problems (especially since it would get exposed to userspace). Maybe > something like: > > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, [Lu Yangbo-B47093] The soc_device_attribut struct is defined as below. struct soc_device_attribute { const char *machine; const char *family; const char *revision; const char *soc_id; }; We can put the 'model' in root node of dts as machine, put 'Freescale QorIQ' as family, and put x.x as revision. Is it ok? As you suggested, you like to use below string as soc_id. It's easy to get svr, but how does the software know the name and die, and put them into this string ? It's a large code to define them. > svr:<SVR minus E bit>,svre:<full SVR including E bit>,name:<soc > name>,die:<soc die name>,rev:X.Y,<tag1>,<tag2>,<...>, Should we remove rev here since there is also a revision member? Regarding the guts_init, we still call guts_init and then match the soc, or we change to use platform driver? Or do you know any better place to call guts_init to initialize only once? Thank you so much :) > > with the final comma used so that globs can put a colon on either end to > be sure they're matching a full field. The SoC die name would be the > primary chip for a given die (e.g. p4040 would have a die name of > p4080). The "name" > and "die" fields would never include the trailing "e" indicated by the E > bit. > > Extra tags could be used for common groupings, such as all chips from a > particular die before a certain revision. Once a tag is added it can't > be removed or reordered, to maintain userspace compatibility, but new > tags could be appended. > > Some examples: > > svr:0x82000020,svre:0x82000020,name:p4080,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > svr:0x82000020,svr > e:0x82080020,name:p4080,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > svr:0x82000030,svre:0x82000030,name: > p4080,die:p4080,rev:3.0, > svr:0x82000030,svre:0x82080030,name:p4080,die:p4080,re > v:3.0, > svr:0x82010020,svre:0x82010020,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > svr:0x820100 > 20,svre:0x82090020,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:2.0, > > svr:0x82010030,svre:0x82010030 > ,name:p4040,die:p4080,rev:3.0, > svr:0x82010030,svre:0x82090030,name:p4040,die:p4 > 080,rev:3.0, > > Then if you want to apply a workaround on: > - all chips using the p4080 die, match with "*,die:p4080,*" > - all chips using the rev 2.0 p4080 die, match with > "*,die:p4080,rev:2.0,*" > - Only p4040, but of any rev, match with "*,name:p4040,*" > > Matching via open-coded hex number should be considered a last resort > (it's more error-prone, either for getting the number wrong or for > forgetting variants -- the latter is already a common problem), but > preferable to adding too many tags. > > Using wildcards within a tag field would be discouraged. > > -Scott ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��i��)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
