Re: [RFC 1/4] ARM: tegra: Move SoC drivers to drivers/soc/tegra

Thierry Reding
2014-06-30T10:49:50Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2293 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:25:12AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 12:27:58AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 01:30:04PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > > On Friday 27 June 2014 12:58 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/cpuidle-tegra114.c (100%)
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/cpuidle-tegra20.c (100%)
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/cpuidle-tegra30.c (100%)
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/cpuidle.c (100%)
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/cpuidle.h (91%)
> > > This should go into drivers/idle/*. if you have dependencies, please sort
> > > them out.
> >
> > What exactly is the difference between drivers/idle and drivers/cpuidle?
> > There's an intel_idle driver in drivers/idle that includes cpuidle.h and
> > registers with that subsystem. But there's also an i7300_idle driver
> > that doesn't.
> >
> > drivers/cpuidle seems like a better fit. I'll look into moving the code
> > there.
>
> Actually, please look at Lorenzo's generic cpuidle series. Basically
> most cpuidle drivers simply define some C states and call the
> corresponding platform back-end. On arm64, we aim to separate the
> back-end in the cpu_operations structure and just have a generic cpuidle
> driver with states defined in the DT (and passed to the back-end).
>
> As for the back-end, what about using PSCI?
>
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/reset-handler.S (100%)
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/reset.c (100%)
> > > > rename {arch/arm/mach-tegra => drivers/soc/tegra}/reset.h (97%)
> > > subsystem: drivers/power/reset/
> >
> > drivers/power/reset seems to be for drivers that register functions to
> > reset a board. The above code for Tegra doesn't do that. Rather it sets
> > up the reset handlers for secondary CPUs and for suspend/resume.
>
> PSCI again?

I have yet to look at what exactly needs to be done on 64-bit Tegra to
get CPUs up. So I'll revisit this part of the patches when that's
happened. It may yet turn out that most of this doesn't need to be
shared after all.

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]