From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] ARM: pmu: add OF match support
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:53:04 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <002801cbc88a$95555270$bffff750$@deacon@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin5aA0tq-PYBmRKh6tLv6bHRaK5ymjhsj9T4-Ah@mail.gmail.com>
Grant,
> > Following on from Rob's update, it would be nice if you could specify that
> > the PMU is a CPU PMU (as opposed to L2-cache, bus, gpu etc) in the string.
> > That way adding different PMUs in the future seems more natural and it accounts
> > for your concerns above. Is that ok, or does the compatible string have to
> > match that used by the platform bus?
>
> It does make sense to encode the specific implementation into the
> compatible string. A single device driver can bind against multiple
> compatible strings. ie. the match table could include {.compatible =
> "arm,cortex-a9-pmu"},{.compatible = "arm,cortex-a9-l2cache-pmu"}...
Ok - that's great! Specifying the CPU is probably a little verbose, but
something like "arm,armv7pmu" would be really helpful when it comes to
multiple devices.
> > As for versioning, the PMU detection is done dynamically at runtime,
> > so knowing that we're poking a CPU is enough.
>
> Fair enough. It is still good practice in the compatible list to
> encode the specific PMU implementation (maybe arm,cortex-a9-pmu?)
> instead of trying to define a 'generic' or wildcard compatible value.
> Newer implementations can always claim compatibility with an older
> implementation so that the kernel doesn't have to be modified to find
> the new devices. "arm,pmu" is probably too generic.
"arm,pmu" is definitely too generic. If it's good practice to specify
as much as possible, then go for it - I just feel a little uneasy having
to add lots of redundant kernel code but it sounds like you'll hopefully
prove me wrong on that :)
Cheers,
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-09 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-09 3:53 [RFC PATCH] ARM: pmu: add OF match support Rob Herring
2011-02-09 9:51 ` Will Deacon
2011-02-09 14:02 ` Rob Herring
2011-02-09 16:55 ` Rob Herring
2011-02-09 17:10 ` Grant Likely
2011-02-09 17:13 ` Grant Likely
2011-02-09 17:17 ` Will Deacon
[not found] ` <3399156206431206254@unknownmsgid>
2011-02-09 18:09 ` Grant Likely
2011-02-09 18:53 ` Will Deacon [this message]
[not found] ` <-4919269306841091192@unknownmsgid>
2011-02-09 19:03 ` Grant Likely
2011-02-09 19:13 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2011-02-09 23:00 ` Rob Herring
2011-02-13 6:23 ` Grant Likely
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='002801cbc88a$95555270$bffff750$@deacon@arm.com' \
--to=will.deacon@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).