From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: add SMP enable-method for Broadcom NSP Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:18:45 -0800 Message-ID: <5660B1B5.5000702@gmail.com> References: <1448987049-17041-1-git-send-email-kapilh@broadcom.com> <1448987049-17041-2-git-send-email-kapilh@broadcom.com> <20151202152604.GA20467@rob-hp-laptop> <565F16F1.9070809@broadcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <565F16F1.9070809@broadcom.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Kapil Hali , Rob Herring Cc: Mark Rutland , Linus Walleij , Kever Yang , Florian Fainelli , Russell King , Lee Jones , Chen-Yu Tsai , bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, Hauke Mehrtens , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , Jon Mason , Ray Jui , Gregory Fong , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Paul Walmsley , Scott Branden , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kumar Gala , Olof Johansson , Maxime Ripard List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 02/12/15 08:06, Kapil Hali wrote: >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt >>> @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ >>> +Broadcom Northstar Plus SoC CPU Enable Method >>> +--------------------------------------------- >>> +This binding defines the enable method used for starting secondary >>> +CPUs in the following Broadcom SoCs: >>> + BCM58522, BCM58525, BCM58535, BCM58622, BCM58623, BCM58625, BCM88312 >>> + >>> +The enable method is specified by defining the following required >>> +properties in the "cpus" device tree node: >>> + - enable-method = "brcm,bcm-nsp-smp"; >>> + - secondary-boot-reg = <...>; >> >> Both of these are supposed to be per cpu core. > > 'enable-method' if not found in 'cpu' node is looked at in the 'cpus' > node. Except for two-three SoC families, 'enable-method' is within > 'cpus' node. Is my interpretation incorrect? Did I miss anything here? So, what do we do from here? I would appreciate a timely answer from the DT maintainers here so we can decide on the fate of this patch series for 4.5. Thank you -- Florian