From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: oss@buserror.net (Scott Wood) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 15:28:44 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 3/5] drivers: clk-qoriq: Add clockgen support for lx2160a In-Reply-To: References: <1534747636-20064-1-git-send-email-vabhav.sharma@nxp.com> <1534747636-20064-4-git-send-email-vabhav.sharma@nxp.com> <4a9ea6b451683ec98c92e86a5ae6b91213a6afcf.camel@buserror.net> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 06:12 +0000, Andy Tang wrote: > Hi Scott, > > Please see my replay inline. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linux-arm-kernel > > On Behalf Of Scott Wood > > Sent: 2018?8?31? 1:43 > > To: Vabhav Sharma ; > > linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; devicetree at vger.kernel.org; > > robh+dt at kernel.org; mark.rutland at arm.com; > > linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; > > mturquette at baylibre.com; sboyd at kernel.org; rjw at rjwysocki.net; > > viresh.kumar at linaro.org; linux-clk at vger.kernel.org; > > linux-pm at vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel-owner at vger.kernel.org; > > catalin.marinas at arm.com; will.deacon at arm.com; > > gregkh at linuxfoundation.org; arnd at arndb.de; > > kstewart at linuxfoundation.org; yamada.masahiro at socionext.com > > Cc: Yogesh Narayan Gaur ; Andy Tang > > ; linux at armlinux.org.uk; Varun Sethi > > ; Udit Kumar > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] drivers: clk-qoriq: Add clockgen support for > > lx2160a > > > > On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 12:39 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 07:36 +0000, Vabhav Sharma wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why are you increasing NUM_CMUX beyond 8 for a chip that only > > > > has > > > > > 8 entries in cmux_to_group? > > > > > > > > Configuration is 16 cores,8 cluster with 2 cores in each cluster > > > > > > So? This is about cmuxes, not cores. You're increasing the array > > > without ever using the new size. > > > > Oh, and you also broke p4080 which has 8 cmuxes but no -1 terminator, > > because the array was of length 8. Probably the array should be changed > > to NUM_CMUX+1 so every array can be -1 terminated. > > > > [Andy] How about we add -1 terminator to p4080 and increase NUM_CMUX to 16? Why 16? What does such a change have to do with this chip, which according to the rest of the patch has 8 cmuxes? > We don't want to increase NUM_CMUX each time new soc with more cmuxes added. You don't want to have to make a trivial change each time you exceed a limit that has yet to be exceeded once since NUM_CMUX was added? This isn't ABI or in any other way hard to change. It's right in the same file as the chip description you'd be adding. And even if a chip did come along with 16 cmuxes, you'd then need to increase the array to 17 to hold the -1 if you don't want to leave a situation like the p4080 is in now, where a chip's cmux array could be broken by increasing NUM_CMUX further. -Scott