From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: ipmi: aspeed: Introduce a v2 binding for KCS
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:01:01 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191220000101.GA16104@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8aec8994bbe1186d257b0a712e13cf914c5ebe35.1576462051.git-series.andrew@aj.id.au>
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:57:40 +1030, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> The v2 binding utilises reg and renames some of the v1 properties.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
> ---
> v2: Rename slave-reg to aspeed,lpc-io-reg
>
> Rob: After our discussion about the name of 'slave-reg' on v1 I've thought
> about it some more and have landed on aspeed,lpc-io-reg. In v1 I argued that
> the name should be generic and you suggested that if so it should go in a
> generic binding document - I've thought about this some more and concluded that
> it was hard to pin down exactly where it should be documented if it were
> generic (the generic ASPEED LPC binding is one place, but that would suggest
> that the property is still ASPEED-specific; maybe some discussion with
> Nuvoton might give some insight).
>
> Regardless, it turns out that the address specification is really
> ASPEED-specific in this case: The KCS host interface in the LPC IO space
> consists of a data and status register, but the slave controller infers the
> address of the second from the address of the first and thus only the address
> of the first can be programmed on the BMC-side. ASPEED supply documentation
> that maps the LPC-side register layout for given LPC IO base addresses. I think
> this is esoteric enough to warrant the aspeed prefix.
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt | 20 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
minyard@acm.org, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org,
robh+dt@kernel.org, joel@jms.id.au,
openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
haiyue.wang@linux.intel.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: ipmi: aspeed: Introduce a v2 binding for KCS
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:01:01 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191220000101.GA16104@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8aec8994bbe1186d257b0a712e13cf914c5ebe35.1576462051.git-series.andrew@aj.id.au>
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:57:40 +1030, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> The v2 binding utilises reg and renames some of the v1 properties.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
> ---
> v2: Rename slave-reg to aspeed,lpc-io-reg
>
> Rob: After our discussion about the name of 'slave-reg' on v1 I've thought
> about it some more and have landed on aspeed,lpc-io-reg. In v1 I argued that
> the name should be generic and you suggested that if so it should go in a
> generic binding document - I've thought about this some more and concluded that
> it was hard to pin down exactly where it should be documented if it were
> generic (the generic ASPEED LPC binding is one place, but that would suggest
> that the property is still ASPEED-specific; maybe some discussion with
> Nuvoton might give some insight).
>
> Regardless, it turns out that the address specification is really
> ASPEED-specific in this case: The KCS host interface in the LPC IO space
> consists of a data and status register, but the slave controller infers the
> address of the second from the address of the first and thus only the address
> of the first can be programmed on the BMC-side. ASPEED supply documentation
> that maps the LPC-side register layout for given LPC IO base addresses. I think
> this is esoteric enough to warrant the aspeed prefix.
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt | 20 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
Cc: openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, mark.rutland@arm.com,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, haiyue.wang@linux.intel.com,
minyard@acm.org, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org,
robh+dt@kernel.org, joel@jms.id.au,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: ipmi: aspeed: Introduce a v2 binding for KCS
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 18:01:01 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191220000101.GA16104@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8aec8994bbe1186d257b0a712e13cf914c5ebe35.1576462051.git-series.andrew@aj.id.au>
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:57:40 +1030, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> The v2 binding utilises reg and renames some of the v1 properties.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>
> ---
> v2: Rename slave-reg to aspeed,lpc-io-reg
>
> Rob: After our discussion about the name of 'slave-reg' on v1 I've thought
> about it some more and have landed on aspeed,lpc-io-reg. In v1 I argued that
> the name should be generic and you suggested that if so it should go in a
> generic binding document - I've thought about this some more and concluded that
> it was hard to pin down exactly where it should be documented if it were
> generic (the generic ASPEED LPC binding is one place, but that would suggest
> that the property is still ASPEED-specific; maybe some discussion with
> Nuvoton might give some insight).
>
> Regardless, it turns out that the address specification is really
> ASPEED-specific in this case: The KCS host interface in the LPC IO space
> consists of a data and status register, but the slave controller infers the
> address of the second from the address of the first and thus only the address
> of the first can be programmed on the BMC-side. ASPEED supply documentation
> that maps the LPC-side register layout for given LPC IO base addresses. I think
> this is esoteric enough to warrant the aspeed prefix.
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt | 20 +++++---
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-20 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-16 2:27 [PATCH v2 0/3] ipmi: kcs-bmc: Rework bindings to clean up DT warnings Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: ipmi: aspeed: Introduce a v2 binding for KCS Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-20 0:01 ` Rob Herring [this message]
2019-12-20 0:01 ` Rob Herring
2019-12-20 0:01 ` Rob Herring
2019-12-16 2:27 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ipmi: kcs: Finish configuring ASPEED KCS device before enable Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ipmi: kcs: aspeed: Implement v2 bindings Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2019-12-16 2:27 ` Andrew Jeffery
2020-04-03 3:50 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] ipmi: kcs-bmc: Rework bindings to clean up DT warnings Andrew Jeffery
2020-04-03 3:50 ` Andrew Jeffery
2020-04-03 3:50 ` Andrew Jeffery
2020-04-03 13:08 ` Corey Minyard
2020-04-03 13:08 ` Corey Minyard
2020-04-03 13:08 ` Corey Minyard
2020-04-05 7:00 ` Andrew Jeffery
2020-04-05 7:00 ` Andrew Jeffery
2020-04-05 7:00 ` Andrew Jeffery
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191220000101.GA16104@bogus \
--to=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.