From: armando.visconti@st.com (Armando VISCONTI)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: QUERY: How to handle SOC Configuration (Peripheral Multiplexing) in linux
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:10:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B9E078C.4010706@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B9DF966.6050504@st.com>
Shiraz,
>> If you do it thru Kconfig still it would be fixed a compilation time.
>> Do you agree or am I missing something?
>>
>
> yes, and if you see, should any one require it dynamically? Each user
> would have his own board with static devices. This configuration (of
> selecting multiplexed devices) depends on his board configuration, which
> is the responsibility of the board configuration file.
>
This was also my understanding at the beginning.
But looking at the response from the community it
looks that it is better to have a single image for all boards
which is capable at runtime to be configured in the proper way.
>> So, probably the correct way is passing peripheral selection information
>> thru
>> bootargs.
>> What do you think?
>>
>
> This is very specific to how an SoC provides multiplexing options and will
> vary greatly. Which option of bootargs are you talking about?
>
Of course not a standard bootargs option.
I was more talking about a new specific option that is
passed thru bootargs and directed to a specific SPEAr function that
can apply the proper cfg and register setting, like someone (Ben?)
was suggesting.
In this option you should pass a bitmap or something like that.
Let me know your opinion on it.
Armando
Shiraz HASHIM wrote:
> Armando,
>
> On 3/15/2010 2:12 PM, Armando VISCONTI wrote:
>
>>> Now, For this we need some interface or channel through which we provide
>>> this information to kernel. This is what precisely i have done. The
>>> channel i
>>> provided is through Kconfig and the function "s300_configure", accepts
>>> this bitmap and configures hardware.
>>>
>>>
>> I'm not getting this point.
>>
>
> yes, Actually this is what we are saying. Seemingly the best option is
> to do it during compilation time, except if we have some standard way
> at booting.
>
>
>> If you do it thru Kconfig still it would be fixed a compilation time.
>> Do you agree or am I missing something?
>>
>
> yes, and if you see, should any one require it dynamically? Each user
> would have his own board with static devices. This configuration (of
> selecting multiplexed devices) depends on his board configuration, which
> is the responsibility of the board configuration file.
>
>
>> So, probably the correct way is passing peripheral selection information
>> thru
>> bootargs.
>> What do you think?
>>
>
> This is very specific to how an SoC provides multiplexing options and will
> vary greatly. Which option of bootargs are you talking about?
>
> regards
> Shiraz
>
--
-- "Every step appears to be the unavoidable consequence of the
-- preceding one." (A. Einstein)
--
Armando Visconti Mobile: (+39) 346 8879146
Senior SW Engineer Fax: (+39) 02 93519290
CPG Work: (+39) 02 93519683
Computer System Division e-mail: armando.visconti at st.com
ST Microelectronics TINA: 051 4683
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-15 10:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-15 4:31 QUERY: How to handle SOC Configuration (Peripheral Multiplexing) in linux Viresh KUMAR
2010-03-15 4:47 ` jassi brar
2010-03-15 5:14 ` Shiraz HASHIM
2010-03-15 5:41 ` jassi brar
2010-03-15 6:32 ` Viresh KUMAR
2010-03-15 6:46 ` jassi brar
2010-03-15 12:55 ` Bill Gatliff
2010-03-15 13:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-15 13:22 ` Bill Gatliff
2010-03-16 2:01 ` jassi brar
2010-03-15 12:52 ` Bill Gatliff
2010-03-15 16:02 ` Armando VISCONTI
2010-03-15 16:53 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-03-15 16:53 ` Bill Gatliff
2010-03-15 17:09 ` Mark Brown
2010-03-15 18:57 ` Tony Lindgren
2010-03-15 18:58 ` Bill Gatliff
2010-03-15 16:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-15 4:57 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2010-03-15 5:15 ` Shiraz HASHIM
2010-03-15 5:28 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2010-03-15 6:34 ` Viresh KUMAR
2010-03-15 6:20 ` Ben Dooks
2010-03-15 6:28 ` Viresh KUMAR
2010-03-15 8:42 ` Armando VISCONTI
2010-03-15 9:09 ` Shiraz HASHIM
2010-03-15 9:37 ` jassi brar
2010-03-15 10:22 ` Shiraz HASHIM
2010-03-15 10:34 ` jassi brar
2010-03-15 10:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-15 10:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-15 10:10 ` Armando VISCONTI [this message]
2010-03-15 10:27 ` Shiraz HASHIM
2010-03-15 7:06 ` Viresh KUMAR
2010-03-17 16:30 ` Ben Dooks
2010-03-19 4:45 ` Viresh KUMAR
2010-03-15 17:55 ` Linus Walleij
2010-03-16 13:39 ` Shiraz HASHIM
2010-03-16 21:55 ` Linus Walleij
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=4B9E078C.4010706@st.com \
--to=armando.visconti@st.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).