From: Clay Chang <clayc@hpe.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <soc@kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"Verdun, Jean-Marie" <verdun@hpe.com>,
"Hawkins, Nick" <nick.hawkins@hpe.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: soc: hpe: hpe,gxp-srom.yaml
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 15:39:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y8jzsmC3azFgbZLP@enigma.ccjz.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55f09599-b553-4429-aa79-ca99ccf95cda@app.fastmail.com>
On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 04:18:59PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023, at 14:42, Clay Chang wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 02:37:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023, at 14:16, Clay Chang wrote:
> >> For the user interface side, I don't really like the idea of
> >> having a hardware register directly exposed as driver in
> >> drivers/soc, this generally makes it impossible to have portable
> >> userspace that works across implementations of multiple SoC
> >> vendors, and it makes it too easy to come up with an ad-hoc
> >> interface to make a chip work for a particular use case when
> >> a more general solution would be better.
> >>
> >
> > I agree with you. I have one question though: if we create a 'hpe'
> > directory under drivers/soc, and put all HPE BMC specific drivers there,
> > do you think this proper?
>
> It certainly wouldn't be right to put "all HPE BMC specific drivers"
> in there. Most drivers will fit into some existing subsystem, and
> should be moved there instead. drivers/soc is used primarily for
> drivers using soc_device_register() to provide information about the
> soc, and we also use it as a place for drivers that just export
> soc-specific helper functions that can be used by other drivers.
>
Sorry for not saying it clearly. I meant to put those HPE BMC related
drivers that are "not specific" to a particular subsystem in
drivers/soc/hpe. For those fit into some existing subsystems go to their
designated places.
> >> Again, it's hard for me to tell why this even needs to be runtime
> >> configurable, please try to describe what type of application
> >> would access the sysfs interface here, and why this can't just
> >> be set to a fixed value by bootloader or kernel without user
> >> interaction.
> >
> > The register is used for communication and synchronization between the
> > BMC and the host. During runtime, user-space daemons configures the
> > value of the register for interactions.
>
> That does not sound very specific. What is the subsystem on the
> host that this communicates with? Can you put the driver into the
> same subsystem?
>
> Arnd
This is a control register in the BMC chip that partially controls host
boot behaviors. When writing to the register, privileged mode is
required. That's why we rely on a kernel driver for writing to the
control register. And, there is no corresponding subsystem in the host
OS. For this case, is it acceptable to put this driver under
drivers/soc/hpe?
Thanks,
Clay
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-19 7:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-10 4:25 [PATCH 0/5] ARM: Add GXP SROM Support clayc
2023-01-10 4:25 ` [PATCH 1/5] soc: hpe: Add GXP SROM Control Register Driver clayc
2023-01-10 9:46 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-01-12 12:46 ` Clay Chang
2023-01-10 4:25 ` [PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: soc: hpe: hpe,gxp-srom.yaml clayc
2023-01-10 9:49 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-01-12 13:16 ` Clay Chang
2023-01-12 13:37 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-01-16 13:42 ` Clay Chang
2023-01-16 15:18 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-01-19 7:39 ` Clay Chang [this message]
2023-01-19 7:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-01-10 4:25 ` [PATCH 3/5] ARM: dts: hpe: Add SROM Driver clayc
2023-01-10 4:25 ` [PATCH 4/5] ARM: multi_v7_defconfig: Add GXP " clayc
2023-01-10 9:50 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-01-12 13:17 ` Clay Chang
2023-01-10 4:25 ` [PATCH 5/5] MAINTAINERS: Add maintainer of GXP SROM support clayc
2023-01-10 9:51 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-01-12 13:18 ` Clay Chang
2023-01-20 2:21 ` [PATCH 0/5] ARM: Add GXP SROM Support Andrew Jeffery
2023-01-31 13:46 ` Clay Chang
2023-02-01 13:28 ` Clay Chang
2023-02-02 1:12 ` Andrew Jeffery
2023-02-02 15:25 ` Clay Chang
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=Y8jzsmC3azFgbZLP@enigma.ccjz.io \
--to=clayc@hpe.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=nick.hawkins@hpe.com \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=soc@kernel.org \
--cc=verdun@hpe.com \
/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).