From: m-karicheri2@ti.com (Murali Karicheri)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Documentation: dt: keystone: provide SoC specific compatible flags
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 10:31:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <560BF254.2040509@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56056FD9.5060000@ti.com>
On 09/25/2015 12:01 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 09/25/2015 10:18 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote:
>> On 9/25/2015 7:50 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> [...]
>>> But, how about userspace
>>> needing to know which SoC they are on, without needing to depend on
>>> board->soc mapping? How do we help resolve that?
Believe it or not, user space tools that are custom to a specific SoC
would require such knowledge. So I agree on this front that a SoC
specific compatibility is cool to have. I think that should have been
clear in the commit description.
My Acked-By: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@ti.com>
>>>
>> Why the user space should care about exact SOC ?
>
> examples vary - trivial one is: debug tools like omapconf[1] or testing
> tools like opentest[2] need some standard way to ensure Linux kernel is
> functional - trusting the least set of parameters is usually what we
> would prefer. while building a generic distro such as debian or yocto,
> one prefers NOT to need to do a package build per SoC/perboard - that
> never scales. instead, you'd like the same application run on different
> systems dynamically.
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/omapconf/omapconf
> [2] http://arago-project.org/wiki/index.php/Opentest
>
--
Murali Karicheri
Linux Kernel, Keystone
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>,
santosh shilimkar
<santosh.shilimkar-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Santosh Shilimkar
<ssantosh-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Documentation: dt: keystone: provide SoC specific compatible flags
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 10:31:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <560BF254.2040509@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56056FD9.5060000-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
On 09/25/2015 12:01 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 09/25/2015 10:18 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote:
>> On 9/25/2015 7:50 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> [...]
>>> But, how about userspace
>>> needing to know which SoC they are on, without needing to depend on
>>> board->soc mapping? How do we help resolve that?
Believe it or not, user space tools that are custom to a specific SoC
would require such knowledge. So I agree on this front that a SoC
specific compatibility is cool to have. I think that should have been
clear in the commit description.
My Acked-By: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>>
>> Why the user space should care about exact SOC ?
>
> examples vary - trivial one is: debug tools like omapconf[1] or testing
> tools like opentest[2] need some standard way to ensure Linux kernel is
> functional - trusting the least set of parameters is usually what we
> would prefer. while building a generic distro such as debian or yocto,
> one prefers NOT to need to do a package build per SoC/perboard - that
> never scales. instead, you'd like the same application run on different
> systems dynamically.
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/omapconf/omapconf
> [2] http://arago-project.org/wiki/index.php/Opentest
>
--
Murali Karicheri
Linux Kernel, Keystone
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@ti.com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
santosh shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com>,
Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@kernel.org>
Cc: <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Documentation: dt: keystone: provide SoC specific compatible flags
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 10:31:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <560BF254.2040509@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56056FD9.5060000@ti.com>
On 09/25/2015 12:01 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 09/25/2015 10:18 AM, santosh shilimkar wrote:
>> On 9/25/2015 7:50 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> [...]
>>> But, how about userspace
>>> needing to know which SoC they are on, without needing to depend on
>>> board->soc mapping? How do we help resolve that?
Believe it or not, user space tools that are custom to a specific SoC
would require such knowledge. So I agree on this front that a SoC
specific compatibility is cool to have. I think that should have been
clear in the commit description.
My Acked-By: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@ti.com>
>>>
>> Why the user space should care about exact SOC ?
>
> examples vary - trivial one is: debug tools like omapconf[1] or testing
> tools like opentest[2] need some standard way to ensure Linux kernel is
> functional - trusting the least set of parameters is usually what we
> would prefer. while building a generic distro such as debian or yocto,
> one prefers NOT to need to do a package build per SoC/perboard - that
> never scales. instead, you'd like the same application run on different
> systems dynamically.
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/omapconf/omapconf
> [2] http://arago-project.org/wiki/index.php/Opentest
>
--
Murali Karicheri
Linux Kernel, Keystone
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-30 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-22 16:08 [PATCH 0/3] ARM: dts/keystone: Introduce SoC specific compatible matches Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] Documentation: dt: keystone: provide SoC specific compatible flags Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-23 18:05 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-23 18:05 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-23 18:05 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-23 19:15 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-23 19:15 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-23 19:15 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-23 18:19 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-23 18:19 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-23 18:19 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-24 14:05 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-24 14:05 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-24 14:05 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-24 14:20 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-24 14:20 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-24 14:20 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-24 15:54 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-24 15:54 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-24 15:54 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-25 14:50 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 14:50 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 14:50 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 15:18 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-25 15:18 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-25 16:01 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 16:01 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 16:01 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 16:15 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-25 16:15 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-25 16:15 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-09-25 17:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 17:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-25 17:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-02 16:09 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-10-02 16:09 ` santosh shilimkar
2015-10-03 23:44 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:44 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:44 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-04 0:16 ` santosh.shilimkar at oracle.com
2015-10-04 0:16 ` santosh.shilimkar
2015-10-04 0:16 ` santosh.shilimkar-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA
2015-09-30 14:31 ` Murali Karicheri [this message]
2015-09-30 14:31 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-30 14:31 ` Murali Karicheri
2015-09-22 16:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] ARM: keystone: Update compatible to have SoC specific matches Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] ARM: dts: keystone: Update SoC specific compatible flags Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-09-22 16:08 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` [PATCH V2 0/3] ARM: dts/keystone: Introduce SoC specific compatible matches Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` [PATCH V2 1/3] Documentation: dt: keystone: provide SoC specific compatible flags Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` [PATCH V2 2/3] ARM: keystone: Update compatible to have SoC specific matches Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` [PATCH V2 3/3] ARM: dts: keystone: Update SoC specific compatible flags Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-03 23:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2015-10-04 0:13 ` [PATCH V2 0/3] ARM: dts/keystone: Introduce SoC specific compatible matches santosh.shilimkar at oracle.com
2015-10-04 0:13 ` santosh.shilimkar
2015-10-04 0:13 ` santosh.shilimkar-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA
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=560BF254.2040509@ti.com \
--to=m-karicheri2@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.