From: eric.y.miao@gmail.com (Eric Miao)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC,PATCH 0/2] Allow late mdesc detection
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:44:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikXejaVsFsudO3ABKzR80V6yCBHm7c6y32hurdt@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1007120904240.10598@xanadu.home>
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
>
>> Hi Nicolas,
>>
>> > The fundamental problem with those patches is that we actually want to
>> > move in the opposite direction for the eventual support of multiple SOCs
>> > in the same kernel, i.e. rely on the machine ID -> mdesc to determine
>> > the right debug addresses at run time and eventually make the addruart
>> > into something that is not hardcoded at compile time.
>>
>> Sure, I think that's where we're going in general, but I think the debug
>> stuff is an exception - we want that up as early as possible, and with
>> as few dependencies on other bits of code as possible.
> [...]
>> I also think it's good to only specify the debug parameters in one place
>> (addruart), rather than have to provide them in adduart *and* the mdesc.
>
> OK I'm convinced.
>
> I'll comment on the actual implementation separately.
>
> PS: I still believe in a per SOC machine ID for DT despite of this, at
> ? ?least for now. ?If we end up not needing it eventually then it could
> ? ?be ignored which is a far easier thing to do (start to ignore stuff)
> ? ?than bite our fingers because we prematurely ditched it.
>
With the introduction of 'struct machine_class', I guess this is especially
true for 1 SoC for one DT machine ID :-)
Finally, if we can decide the 'struct machine_class' by something else,
then we can merge all DT machine IDs into one or completely ignore it.
>
> Nicolas
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-13 5:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-12 3:03 [RFC,PATCH 0/2] Allow late mdesc detection Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-12 3:03 ` [RFC,PATCH 2/2] arm: use addruart macro to establish debug mappings Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-12 13:42 ` [RFC, PATCH " Nicolas Pitre
2010-07-12 13:52 ` [RFC,PATCH " Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-07-13 1:42 ` Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-12 3:03 ` [RFC,PATCH 1/2] arm: don't check MMU status in every addruart macro Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-12 13:32 ` [RFC, PATCH " Nicolas Pitre
2010-07-13 1:39 ` Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-12 3:39 ` [RFC,PATCH 0/2] Allow late mdesc detection Nicolas Pitre
2010-07-12 8:05 ` Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-12 8:39 ` Eric Miao
2010-07-12 13:11 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-07-13 5:44 ` Eric Miao [this message]
2010-07-13 7:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-07-13 9:02 ` Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-13 9:33 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-07-14 3:25 ` Nicolas Pitre
2010-07-14 4:11 ` Jeremy Kerr
2010-07-14 15:36 ` Bryan Huntsman
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=AANLkTikXejaVsFsudO3ABKzR80V6yCBHm7c6y32hurdt@mail.gmail.com \
--to=eric.y.miao@gmail.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).