From: ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com (Ezequiel Garcia)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: mvebu: mbus device tree binding
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 09:44:21 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130520124420.GA3030@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130520123153.GA2904@localhost>
Hi,
Adding Jason to the discussion.
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:31:53AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> Hello Arnd and Jason,
>
> Let's advance with the DT binding for mvebu-mbus,
> and perhaps have it ready for v3.11.
>
> Our current approach to the mbus-windows allocation is as follows:
>
> 1. Every device is located as a child of the soc/internal-regs node.
> The DT contains information for the assigned address space,
> encoded in the 'ranges' property, like this:
>
> soc {
>
> ranges = < internal-regs
> PCIe
> NOR
> ... >;
> internal-regs {
> ...
> };
> }
>
>
> 2. Each driver is in charge of allocating the mbus windows, using
> the mbus API and the address region obtained through the information
> on the device tree.
>
> Now, this approach is particularly error-prone because of (1). The
> 'ranges' entry in a given .dtsi file is overrided by the 'ranges'
> in the per-board .dts file. So, when if we need to declare a node for a
> NOR device, we need to duplicate all ranges entries from the parent
> .dtsi files.
>
> This does not seem to be hugely problematic, for one could put the
> 'ranges' property only in the per-board files, and remove it from the
> common dtsi.
>
> Therefore, first of all I'd like to know:
>
> **1** What's so broken with the current approach that makes us seek for
> solution, in the form of an mbus DT binding?
>
> In addition, reading the previous discussion you've had about this, I
> noticed Arnd suggested (and even required) that the mbus binding should
> update the ranges property in the DT blob each time an address window
> is dynamically allocated.
>
> **2** Why is this required? Who will read the updated ranges
> information?
> Why can't the kernel access the mbus API to obtain information
> about currently allocated windows?
>
> Those are my questions for now and I'm quite sure many more will come
> in the future, so please bare with me!
>
> Thanks a lot,
> --
> Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
> http://free-electrons.com
--
Ezequiel Garc?a, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-20 12:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-20 12:31 mvebu: mbus device tree binding Ezequiel Garcia
2013-05-20 12:44 ` Ezequiel Garcia [this message]
2013-05-20 16:25 ` Greg
2013-05-21 9:35 ` Thomas Petazzoni
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=20130520124420.GA3030@localhost \
--to=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.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).