On 03/02/2011 03:55 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote: > On 03/01/2011 06:41 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote: >> On 03/02/2011 03:23 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote: >>> I don't have any attachment to the "arch" file suggestion. If there is a >>> better solution to identify the different implementations of socinfo >>> without having to maintain some "unique id" list in the kernel, then I'm >>> all for it. But cpuinfo is not it. >> >> Sorry I am confusing the 'arch' and 'mach' bits here. I definitely have >> an objection to having an 'arch' file (i.e. ARM). A 'mach' (i.e. omap) >> file makes a bit more sense, but should probably be called 'mach' rather >> than 'arch' to avoid this confusion :-). > > Sorry for the confusion. Sure, I don't care much for the filename as > long as we can all agree on it. I care more about the content of the > file (using names very close to xxxx in mach-xxxx). I like "soc-family" > better since it's generic enough to not force, say omap3 and omap4, to > report different values. > > Linus Walleij, Eduardo, Maxime, Andrei, > > Would like to hear your opinion on the file name (soc-family vs. mach vs > <somethingelse>) and the path /sys/devices/system/soc/. 'family' sounds good. I don't think we need the 'soc-' prefix on filenames if they are already in /sys/devices/system/soc/. > > If we settle on this, may be it would be easier to get this through. > >> I still think it is a solution in search of a problem though. What >> userspace programs need to know what specific SoC they are on? My >> feeling is that if userspace needs to know this information, then it is >> probably dicking around with things that should be managed by the >> kernel. Differences in available peripherals, etc can be determined by >> looking at existing sysfs files. > > I certainly have seen several use cases. Couple of easy examples: > > * A lot of test scripts would find this very useful. For example, some > clock (present is all/most MSMs) shouldn't be tested on some SOCs as it > would lock up the system if you try to turn it off while the CPU is > running. I don't follow here. Do you mean a struct clk clock or something else? Why is userspace allowed to disable a clock which will effectively hang the system? :-). > * Some of the user space tools might want to report different "product > id/type" (nothing to do with USB, etc) depending on what SOC it is > running on. This makes more sense. It would actually be useful for custom USB devices (gadget) which can be done from user space. ~Ryan -- Bluewater Systems Ltd - ARM Technology Solution Centre Ryan Mallon 5 Amuri Park, 404 Barbadoes St ryan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PO Box 13 889, Christchurch 8013 http://www.bluewatersys.com New Zealand Phone: +64 3 3779127 Freecall: Australia 1800 148 751 Fax: +64 3 3779135 USA 1800 261 2934 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
