From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suzuki K Poulose Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] coresight: Cleanup coresight DT bindings Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 17:14:03 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1531997715-6767-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <1531997715-6767-10-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <20180725160939.GA24323@rob-hp-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180725160939.GA24323@rob-hp-laptop> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, frowand.list@gmail.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, matt.sealey@arm.com, charles.garcia-tobin@arm.com, coresight@lists.linaro.org, john.horley@arm.com, mike.leach@linaro.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 07/25/2018 05:09 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:55:13AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >> The coresight drivers relied on default bindings for graph >> in DT, while reusing the "reg" field of the "ports" to indicate >> the actual hardware port number for the connections. This can >> cause duplicate ports with same addresses, but different >> direction. However, with the rules getting stricter w.r.t to the >> address mismatch with the label, it is no longer possible to use >> the port address field for the hardware port number. >> >> This patch introduces new DT binding rules for coresight >> components, based on the same generic DT graph bindings, but >> avoiding the address duplication. >> >> - All output ports must be specified under a child node with >> name "out-ports". >> - All input ports must be specified under a childe node with >> name "in-ports". >> - Port address should match the hardware port number. >> >> The support for legacy bindings is retained, with a warning. >> >> Cc: Mathieu Poirier >> Cc: Sudeep Holla >> Cc: Rob Herring >> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt | 91 ++++++++++---------- >> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/of_coresight.c | 97 +++++++++++++++++++--- >> 2 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt >> index 8e21512..f39d2c6 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt >> @@ -104,19 +104,9 @@ The connections must be described via generic DT graph bindings as described >> by the "bindings/graph.txt", where each "port" along with an "endpoint" >> component represents a hardware port and the connection. >> >> -Since it is possible to have multiple connections for any coresight component >> -with a specific direction of data flow, each connection must define the >> -following properties to uniquely identify the connection details. >> - >> - * Direction of the data flow w.r.t the component : >> - Each input port must have the following property defined at the "endpoint" >> - for the port. >> - "slave-mode" >> - >> - * Hardware Port number at the component: >> - - The hardware port number is assumed to be the address of the "port" >> - component. >> - > > Why do you add this in the previous patch and then remove it here? The only use case I can think of it is for someone to look back on the legacy bindings, which were never documented. I could skip the parts that are being removed. Suzuki