From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.coquelin-nonst@stericsson.com (Maxime Coquelin) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:53:03 +0100 Subject: [PATCHv5 0/3] Introduce the /proc/socinfo and use it to export OMAP data In-Reply-To: References: <1273587331-24604-1-git-send-email-eduardo.valentin@nokia.com> <20110216115729.GA29817@besouro.research.nokia.com> <4D6B78BF.1020102@stericsson.com> <4D6C7B56.9060109@codeaurora.org> <4D6D9B10.9000606@codeaurora.org> <4D6D9D06.2020204@bluewatersys.com> <4D6D9FC7.1090206@codeaurora.org> <4D6DA290.2010607@bluewatersys.com> <4D6DAA24.3000204@codeaurora.org> <4D6DAE6E.4030701@bluewatersys.com> <4D6DB1B1.4060908@codeaurora.org> <4D6DFE67.3020801@stericsson.com> Message-ID: <4D6E218F.2020804@stericsson.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/02/2011 11:36 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Maxime Coquelin > wrote: > >> I think we should have a tree like this : >> >> /sys/devices/system/soc/ >> /sys/devices/system/soc/unique_id<- Unified way to export an ID for all machs > Arbitrary number of bits? Some will have a 64-bit ID, some will have 32-bit > etc. Yes, here is the difficulty. For example, in our case, the SoC unique ID is 160 bits long. Maybe it would be a better solution to get rid of this unified file, and keep only mach specific entries? I mean : /sys/devices/system/soc/ /sys/devices/system/soc/mach_name /sys/devices/system/soc/foo_id /sys/devices/system/soc/bar_id > Should we say it's a hex string of 64 bits? > >> /sys/devices/system/soc/mach/ >> /sys/devices/system/soc/mach/name<- Name of the mach >> /sys/devices/system/soc/mach/foo_id >> /sys/devices/system/soc/mach/bar_id<- Vendors may have several/different IDs >> to export (IDCODE for OMAP, Production ID...) > For Ux500 we can export the stuff we print today in mach-ux500/id.c, > put in place earlier by Rabin, I'd prefer if you hook in the new ID stuff > there as well, since it's so little platform code, and a logical place to > have it in. I agree. Regards, Maxime