From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: zynq: Add OCM node Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:07:10 +0000 Message-ID: <20150212150709.GG1522@leverpostej> References: <6df19b400e314ef8228be475bb8ba83765683016.1423737765.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com> <20150212105443.GB1522@leverpostej> <5c1602f83c594a72aac78c245f1830fa@BL2FFO11FD052.protection.gbl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5c1602f83c594a72aac78c245f1830fa@BL2FFO11FD052.protection.gbl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?utf-8?B?U8O2cmVu?= Brinkmann Cc: Michal Simek , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "monstr@monstr.eu" , Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= , Russell King , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Steffen Trumtrar , Kumar Gala , Peter Crosthwaite , Ian Campbell , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Rob Herring , Josh Cartwright , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 02:58:36PM +0000, S=C3=B6ren Brinkmann wrote: > On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 12:01PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > On 02/12/2015 11:54 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:42:47AM +0000, Michal Simek wrote: > > >> Add OCM node for all zynq boards. OCM location > > >> can changed but for all current boards this > > >> is the location where OCM is.` > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > > >> --- > > >> > > >> Changes in v2: > > >> - Move node to board file suggested by Mark > > >> > > >> This patch is done based on discussion here. > > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/1/396 > > >> > > >> Mark: I expect you won't like amba bus reference or > > >> am I wrong? > > >=20 > > > I'm fine with dropping things onto a bus in this way. If we're ha= ppy to > > > do it for other nodes I don't see why busses should be special. > >=20 > > Wonderful. I will give people some time to comment this style. >=20 > Given that the location is discoverable, wouldn't it make sense to le= t > 'reg' point to the ctrl/cfg registers in the SLCR and let the driver > handle the whereabouts of the OCM location? (but I guess this is goin= g > in circles now, such a proposal was on the table at some point, IIRC)= =2E > But I'd prefer: > memory-controller@0xfffc0000 { /* the address here would of course n= ot match all configurations */ I'd really prefer that we keep the unit-address and reg consistent. Given that the address may change on a per-board basis, it simply has t= o live in the board file. However, given that all boards are currently the same it could be dropped in the SoC file for now, with a comment saying it should be factored out to boards when the first board with a different address comes along. Thanks, Mark.