Re: [PATCH v9 01/15] ARM: Add Krait L2 register accessor functions

[Sricharan R <sricharan@codeaurora.org>]

Hi Stephen,

On 5/31/2018 1:11 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Sricharan R (2018-05-30 21:57:20)
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> On 5/30/2018 9:25 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Quoting Sricharan R (2018-05-24 22:40:11)
>>>> Hi Bjorn,
>>>>
>>>> On 5/24/2018 11:09 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>>>> On Tue 06 Mar 06:38 PST 2018, Sricharan R wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Krait CPUs have a handful of L2 cache controller registers that
>>>>>> live behind a cp15 based indirection register. First you program
>>>>>> the indirection register (l2cpselr) to point the L2 'window'
>>>>>> register (l2cpdr) at what you want to read/write.  Then you
>>>>>> read/write the 'window' register to do what you want. The
>>>>>> l2cpselr register is not banked per-cpu so we must lock around
>>>>>> accesses to it to prevent other CPUs from re-pointing l2cpdr
>>>>>> underneath us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> This should have your signed-off-by here as well.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  ok.
>>>>
>>>>> Apart from that:
>>>>>
>>>>> Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Will these patches come around again? I'll do a quick sweep on them
>>> today but I expect them to be resent.
>>
>> Sure, i will have to resend them again, fixing couple of Bjorn's
>> minor comments. Will address your comments that you would give
>> as well along with that.
>>
> 
> Ok. One general comment is that it would be nice if the bindings for all
> the nodes that are introduced included 'clocks' properties and also
> maybe 'clock-names' properties for the clocks that are consumed by each
> node. Right now, we hide those details from DT and rely on the string
> names to hook the clk tree up for us. That sort of prevents us from
> moving away from string easily, so I would just throw the clocks into
> the binding right now and always have them there just in case we want to
> use the binding to figure out the hierarchy in the future.
> 

 ok, understand that mostly. So will try to revamp those patches with
 the 'clocks' property in the binding added, reading them in the driver
 from DT.

> I've been thinking we need to do something similar for the gcc and other
> nodes for any clks they use, but I haven't gotten around to it.
> 
> Otherwise the patches look mostly ok to me. Not sure I'll have any other
> comments.
> 

 Thanks, will respin.

Regards,
 Sricharan

-- 
"QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus