* Re: [PATCH 00/10] PAPR virtualization on PR KVM
From: Alexander Graf @ 2011-08-09 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, paulus, kvm, kvm-ppc
In-Reply-To: <4E41638A.2010707@redhat.com>
On 08/09/2011 06:42 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 07:31 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> In KVM for Book3S PPC we currently have 2 implementations. There
>> is the PR based implementation which works on any POWER system
>> you pass in and the super fast HV implementation which requires
>> libre firmware (so almost nobody can use it).
>
> Did you mean, non-libre?
No, I did mean libre :). Usually firmware on IBM POWER systems already
uses the hypervisor mode for itself, so we can't leverage it. The only
system that is publicly available and can run HV KVM is the YDL
PowerStation which is running SLOF, an open source firmware.
>
>>
>> Currently, the two target two different machine types, with PR KVM
>> being used for bare metal system virtualization, while the HV KVM
>> is used to virtualize PAPR.
>>
>> In an effort to make things more cozy and transparent to the user,
>> this patch set implements PAPR capabilities to the PR KVM side, so
>> a user doesn't have to worry what the respective kernel module
>> supports. Any machine he's virtualizing "just works".
>>
>
> Nice. I went though it and nothing shouted "I'm wrong, kill me
> please", though I don't claim to understand more than 5% of it.
Heh :). The thing giving me the most headaches here is the ENABLE_CAP
part on PAPR. I'd love to have a more flexible framework there that can
configure kvm into the right mode of operation completely, so we get the
chance of passing back "Sorry, that mode doesn't work for me" at the end
of the day.
But I guess we can just do that with the cap enablings too. It's just
slightly more icky.
Alex
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 07/10] KVM: PPC: Add PAPR hypercall code for PR mode
From: Alexander Graf @ 2011-08-09 16:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, paulus, kvm, kvm-ppc
In-Reply-To: <4E41651C.7050709@redhat.com>
On 08/09/2011 06:49 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 07:46 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 08/09/2011 06:40 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 08/09/2011 07:31 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> When running a PAPR guest, we need to handle a few hypercalls in
>>>> kernel space,
>>>> most prominently the page table invalidation (to sync the shadows).
>>>>
>>>> So this patch adds handling for a few PAPR hypercalls to PR mode
>>>> KVM. I tried
>>>> to share the code with HV mode, but it ended up being a lot easier
>>>> this way
>>>> around, as the two differ too much in those details.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_pr_papr.c
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Copyright (C) 2011. Freescale Inc. All rights reserved.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Authors:
>>>> + * Alexander Graf<agraf@suse.de>
>>>> + * Paul Mackerras<paulus@samba.org>
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Description:
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Hypercall handling for running PAPR guests in PR KVM on Book 3S
>>>> + * processors.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>>>> modify
>>>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License, version
>>>> 2, as
>>>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>>>> + */
>>>
>>> Copyright freescale, authors Paul and yourself?
>>
>> Yeah, I'm reasonably clueless when it comes to legal stuff. This code
>> is inspired by Paul's, but is mostly rewritten since it's so tied
>> into the virtual MMU. What would the copyright be in that case?
>
> Just put your own (or your employers'). If someone contributed to the
> code they can add their copyrights (or ask you do do it before
> inclusion).
>
> It would be good to get Paul's or Ben's so that the unimportant
> characters between the whitespace get some braintime.
So you mean I just put both copyright statements there? That's a nice idea!
Alex
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 07/10] KVM: PPC: Add PAPR hypercall code for PR mode
From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-08-09 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexander Graf; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, paulus, kvm, kvm-ppc
In-Reply-To: <4E4165AB.8030704@suse.de>
On 08/09/2011 07:51 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Just put your own (or your employers'). If someone contributed to
>> the code they can add their copyrights (or ask you do do it before
>> inclusion).
>>
>> It would be good to get Paul's or Ben's so that the unimportant
>> characters between the whitespace get some braintime.
>
>
> So you mean I just put both copyright statements there? That's a nice
> idea!
>
>
I meant Paul's or Ben's *review*.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: FW: Ethernet driver WR linux
From: Scott Wood @ 2011-08-09 17:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: smitha.vanga; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
In-Reply-To: <07ACDFB8ECA8EF47863A613BC01BBB220344EACF@HYD-MKD-MBX02.wipro.com>
On 08/09/2011 12:46 AM, smitha.vanga@wipro.com wrote:
> Thank Scott. I am working on a legacy project Which is using 2.6.21
> linux kernel so the device tree is based on that.
Your original e-mail said you were using 2.6.38 ("I have bringup WR
linux 2.6.38 on a custom mpc8247 board").
> Can you let me why the probe error of the driver happens.
No. There were a lot of fixes and improvements that went into this code
since then, including removing hardcoded assumptions about the hardware
that are described in the device tree with the current binding. If you
don't want the fixes that come with a newer version, you're on your own
repeating that work.
-Scott
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Scott Wood @ 2011-08-09 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt; +Cc: netdev, U Bhaskar-B22300, socketcan-core, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <1312901031-29887-6-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com>
On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
> the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
> The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
> so we are removing the file.
That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
the node.
Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
> Additionally, the p1010*dts files are not
> following the standard for node naming in that they have a trailing -v1.0.
What "standard for node naming"? There's nothing wrong with putting a
block version number in the compatible string, and it looks like the
p1010 dts files were following the binding document in this regard. It
is common practice when the block version is publicly documented but
there's no register it can be read from at runtime.
-Scott
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-09 18:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood; +Cc: netdev, U Bhaskar-B22300, socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <4E4179CB.6030101@freescale.com>
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 01:17:47PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
> > the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
> > The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
> > so we are removing the file.
>
> That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
> the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
> configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
> inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
> the node.
There are no properties other than the required properties. The others
were wrongly introduced and are not needed by the driver. When we
removed the other properties and the wrong documentation of the mscan
oscillator source in the fsl-flexcan.txt file, we were left with an
Example: section and a one-line statement "The only properties supported
are the required properties." That seemed like the fsl-flexcan.txt
file was then pointless.
> Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
> bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
Ok. I can do that too. Who is the definitive source for that answer?
I assume we are talking about the fsl-flexcan.txt file when we say
binding. Is that correct?
> > Additionally, the p1010*dts files are not
> > following the standard for node naming in that they have a trailing -v1.0.
>
> What "standard for node naming"? There's nothing wrong with putting a
For the answer to that, you will need to ask Wolfgang Grandegger. I was
working from his feedback. Looking at the plethora of other node names,
the vast majority do not have any -v#.#, and the ones that do also tend
to have multiple versions. Based upon that, I suspect he is correct,
but I do not know where the documentation is or if it even exists.
> block version number in the compatible string, and it looks like the
> p1010 dts files were following the binding document in this regard. It
> is common practice when the block version is publicly documented but
> there's no register it can be read from at runtime.
Thanks,
Robin
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Scott Wood @ 2011-08-09 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt
Cc: netdev, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, U Bhaskar-B22300,
socketcan-core, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <20110809184524.GB4926@sgi.com>
On 08/09/2011 01:45 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 01:17:47PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
>>> the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
>>> The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
>>> so we are removing the file.
>>
>> That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
>> the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
>> configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
>> inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
>> the node.
>
> There are no properties other than the required properties. The others
> were wrongly introduced and are not needed by the driver.
Not needed by this driver, or will never be needed by any reasonable
driver (or is not a good description of the hardware)?
The device tree is not an internal Linux implementation detail. It is
shared by other OSes, firmwares, hypervisors, etc. Bindings should be
created with care, and kept stable unless there's a good reason to break
compatibility.
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org should be CCed on device tree
discussions.
> When we
> removed the other properties and the wrong documentation of the mscan
> oscillator source in the fsl-flexcan.txt file, we were left with an
> Example: section and a one-line statement "The only properties supported
> are the required properties." That seemed like the fsl-flexcan.txt
> file was then pointless.
There is the compatible string, and you could mention that there is a
single reg resource and a single interrupt.
>> Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
>> bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
>
> Ok. I can do that too. Who is the definitive source for that answer?
For policy questions on device tree bindings? Grant Likely is the
maintainer for device tree stuff.
A lot of the simpler bindings have been left undocumented so far, IMHO
it should be a goal to document them all. There are some existing ones
that are documented despite not having special properties, e.g.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serio/altera_ps2.txt,
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sirf.txt,
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/nintendo/wii.txt, etc.
> I assume we are talking about the fsl-flexcan.txt file when we say
> binding. Is that correct?
Yes, although devicetree.org is another possibility.
>>> Additionally, the p1010*dts files are not
>>> following the standard for node naming in that they have a trailing -v1.0.
>>
>> What "standard for node naming"? There's nothing wrong with putting a
>
> For the answer to that, you will need to ask Wolfgang Grandegger. I was
> working from his feedback. Looking at the plethora of other node names,
> the vast majority do not have any -v#.#, and the ones that do also tend
> to have multiple versions. Based upon that, I suspect he is correct,
> but I do not know where the documentation is or if it even exists.
There's a lot of crap in old bindings, plus it's not appropriate for all
circumstances (specifying bindings should be done a little more
carefully than "what do most other bindings do?"). It's something we've
been doing lately for blocks that have a version number, but it's not
dynamically readable.
Looking in the FlexCAN chapter of the p1010 manual, I don't see any
reference to a block version, and I do see references to "previous
FlexCAN versions". So I suggest "fsl,p1010-flexcan".
-Scott
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Wolfgang Grandegger @ 2011-08-09 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood
Cc: netdev, Devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, U Bhaskar-B22300,
socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <4E4179CB.6030101@freescale.com>
On 08/09/2011 08:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
>> the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
>> The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
>> so we are removing the file.
>
> That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
> the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
> configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
> inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
> the node.
>
> Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
> bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
Yes, of course. The commit message misleading. We do not intend to
remove the binding but just a few unused and confusing properties.
Concerning the compatible string, Freescale introduced for the Flexcan
on the P1010 "fsl,flexcan-v1.0". That's not the usual convention also
because the v1.0 if for the PowerPC cores only, I assume, but we have
ARM cores as well. If we need to distinguish I think we should use:
"fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan"
Do you agree?
>> Additionally, the p1010*dts files are not
>> following the standard for node naming in that they have a trailing -v1.0.
>
> What "standard for node naming"? There's nothing wrong with putting a
> block version number in the compatible string, and it looks like the
> p1010 dts files were following the binding document in this regard. It
> is common practice when the block version is publicly documented but
> there's no register it can be read from at runtime.
See above.
Furthermore I must admit, that the bindings shown up mainline Linux have
never been presented on any mailing list.
Wolfgang.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Wolfgang Grandegger @ 2011-08-09 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood
Cc: netdev, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, U Bhaskar-B22300,
socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <4E4186BD.5000602@freescale.com>
On 08/09/2011 09:13 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 01:45 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 01:17:47PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>>> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
>>>> the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
>>>> The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
>>>> so we are removing the file.
>>>
>>> That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
>>> the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
>>> configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
>>> inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
>>> the node.
>>
>> There are no properties other than the required properties. The others
>> were wrongly introduced and are not needed by the driver.
>
> Not needed by this driver, or will never be needed by any reasonable
> driver (or is not a good description of the hardware)?
>
> The device tree is not an internal Linux implementation detail. It is
> shared by other OSes, firmwares, hypervisors, etc. Bindings should be
> created with care, and kept stable unless there's a good reason to break
> compatibility.
>
> devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org should be CCed on device tree
> discussions.
Yes. The doc for the bindings we speak about
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
sneaked into the kernel without been presented on any mailing list and
without the corresponding driver patch.
>> When we
>> removed the other properties and the wrong documentation of the mscan
>> oscillator source in the fsl-flexcan.txt file, we were left with an
>> Example: section and a one-line statement "The only properties supported
>> are the required properties." That seemed like the fsl-flexcan.txt
>> file was then pointless.
>
> There is the compatible string, and you could mention that there is a
> single reg resource and a single interrupt.
>
>>> Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
>>> bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
>>
>> Ok. I can do that too. Who is the definitive source for that answer?
>
> For policy questions on device tree bindings? Grant Likely is the
> maintainer for device tree stuff.
>
> A lot of the simpler bindings have been left undocumented so far, IMHO
> it should be a goal to document them all. There are some existing ones
> that are documented despite not having special properties, e.g.
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serio/altera_ps2.txt,
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/sirf.txt,
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/nintendo/wii.txt, etc.
>
>> I assume we are talking about the fsl-flexcan.txt file when we say
>> binding. Is that correct?
>
> Yes, although devicetree.org is another possibility.
>
>>>> Additionally, the p1010*dts files are not
>>>> following the standard for node naming in that they have a trailing -v1.0.
>>>
>>> What "standard for node naming"? There's nothing wrong with putting a
>>
>> For the answer to that, you will need to ask Wolfgang Grandegger. I was
>> working from his feedback. Looking at the plethora of other node names,
>> the vast majority do not have any -v#.#, and the ones that do also tend
>> to have multiple versions. Based upon that, I suspect he is correct,
>> but I do not know where the documentation is or if it even exists.
>
> There's a lot of crap in old bindings, plus it's not appropriate for all
> circumstances (specifying bindings should be done a little more
> carefully than "what do most other bindings do?"). It's something we've
> been doing lately for blocks that have a version number, but it's not
> dynamically readable.
>
> Looking in the FlexCAN chapter of the p1010 manual, I don't see any
> reference to a block version, and I do see references to "previous
> FlexCAN versions". So I suggest "fsl,p1010-flexcan".
OK, just
"fsl,p1010-flexcan"
or
"fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan"
Note that the Flexcan is used on Freescale ARM cores as well (and device
tree for ARM will show up soon).
Wolfgang.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Scott Wood @ 2011-08-09 19:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wolfgang Grandegger
Cc: netdev, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, U Bhaskar-B22300,
socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <4E418F2D.4060504@grandegger.com>
On 08/09/2011 02:49 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> Yes. The doc for the bindings we speak about
>
> http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
>
> sneaked into the kernel without been presented on any mailing list and
> without the corresponding driver patch.
It was posted on linuxppc-dev:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/91980/
Though I agree it should have been posted more widely.
> OK, just
>
> "fsl,p1010-flexcan"
>
> or
>
> "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan"
I'm ok with the latter, if there's enough in common that it's
conceivable that a driver wouldn't care. The more specific compatible
will be there if the driver wants to make use of it later.
-Scot
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Scott Wood @ 2011-08-09 20:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wolfgang Grandegger
Cc: netdev, Devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, U Bhaskar-B22300,
socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <4E418B39.6040408@grandegger.com>
On 08/09/2011 02:32 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 08:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
>>> the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
>>> The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
>>> so we are removing the file.
>>
>> That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
>> the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
>> configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
>> inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
>> the node.
>>
>> Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
>> bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
>
> Yes, of course. The commit message misleading. We do not intend to
> remove the binding but just a few unused and confusing properties.
Is it a matter of the current driver not caring, or the properties just
not making sense for any reasonable driver (ambiguous, inferrable from
the flexcan version, software configuration, etc)?
-Scott
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-09 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood
Cc: netdev, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, U Bhaskar-B22300,
socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <4E419180.3090507@freescale.com>
I guess my poor wording may have gotten me in trouble. I am getting
ready to repost this patch, but I want to ensure I am getting it as
right as possible.
I think I should reword the commit message to indicate we are removing
the Documentation/.../fsl-flexcan.txt file which has essentially become
empty and change the p1010si.dtsi file's can nodes to "fsl,p1010-flexcan",
"fsl,flexcan". Is that correct?
Thanks,
Robin
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 02:58:56PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 02:49 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> > Yes. The doc for the bindings we speak about
> >
> > http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.0.1/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
> >
> > sneaked into the kernel without been presented on any mailing list and
> > without the corresponding driver patch.
>
> It was posted on linuxppc-dev:
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/91980/
>
> Though I agree it should have been posted more widely.
>
> > OK, just
> >
> > "fsl,p1010-flexcan"
> >
> > or
> >
> > "fsl,p1010-flexcan", "fsl,flexcan"
>
> I'm ok with the latter, if there's enough in common that it's
> conceivable that a driver wouldn't care. The more specific compatible
> will be there if the driver wants to make use of it later.
>
> -Scot
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 07/10] KVM: PPC: Add PAPR hypercall code for PR mode
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2011-08-09 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: kvm-ppc, linuxppc-dev, paulus, Alexander Graf, kvm
In-Reply-To: <4E4167F9.5090305@redhat.com>
On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 20:01 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 07:51 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >> Just put your own (or your employers'). If someone contributed to
> >> the code they can add their copyrights (or ask you do do it before
> >> inclusion).
> >>
> >> It would be good to get Paul's or Ben's so that the unimportant
> >> characters between the whitespace get some braintime.
> >
> >
> > So you mean I just put both copyright statements there? That's a nice
> > idea!
> >
> >
>
> I meant Paul's or Ben's *review*.
Ben's currently travelling doing some bringup :-) I will try to have a
look but I can't promise anything for the next 2 weeks.
Cheers,
Ben.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings
From: Alex Williamson @ 2011-08-09 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Avi Kivity
Cc: chrisw, Alexey Kardashevskiy, kvm, Paul Mackerras,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel, aafabbri, iommu,
Anthony Liguori, linuxppc-dev, benve
In-Reply-To: <4E3F9E33.5000706@redhat.com>
On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 11:28 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/03/2011 05:04 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > I still don't understand the distinction you're making. We're saying
> > the group is "owned" by a given user or guest in the sense that no-one
> > else may use anything in the group (including host drivers). At that
> > point none, some or all of the devices in the group may actually be
> > used by the guest.
> >
> > You seem to be making a distinction between "owned by" and "assigned
> > to" and "used by" and I really don't see what it is.
> >
>
> Alex (and I) think that we should work with device/function granularity,
> as is common with other archs, and that the group thing is just a
> constraint on which functions may be assigned where, while you think
> that we should work at group granularity, with 1-function groups for
> archs which don't have constraints.
>
> Is this an accurate way of putting it?
Mostly correct, yes. x86 isn't immune to the group problem, it shows up
for us any time there's a PCIe-to-PCI bridge in the device hierarchy.
We lose resolution of devices behind the bridge. As you state though, I
think of this as only a constraint on what we're able to do with those
devices.
Perhaps part of the differences is that on x86 the constraints don't
really effect how we expose devices to the guest. We need to hold
unused devices in the group hostage and use the same iommu domain for
any devices assigned, but that's not visible to the guest. AIUI, POWER
probably needs to expose the bridge (or at least an emulated bridge) to
the guest, any devices in the group need to show up behind that bridge,
some kind of pvDMA needs to be associated with that group, there might
be MMIO segments and IOVA windows, etc. Effectively you want to
transplant the entire group into the guest. Is that right? Thanks,
Alex
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2011-08-10 2:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alex Williamson
Cc: chrisw, Alexey Kardashevskiy, kvm, Paul Mackerras,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel, aafabbri, iommu,
Avi Kivity, Anthony Liguori, linuxppc-dev, benve
In-Reply-To: <1312932258.4524.55.camel@bling.home>
> Mostly correct, yes. x86 isn't immune to the group problem, it shows up
> for us any time there's a PCIe-to-PCI bridge in the device hierarchy.
> We lose resolution of devices behind the bridge. As you state though, I
> think of this as only a constraint on what we're able to do with those
> devices.
>
> Perhaps part of the differences is that on x86 the constraints don't
> really effect how we expose devices to the guest. We need to hold
> unused devices in the group hostage and use the same iommu domain for
> any devices assigned, but that's not visible to the guest. AIUI, POWER
> probably needs to expose the bridge (or at least an emulated bridge) to
> the guest, any devices in the group need to show up behind that bridge,
Yes, pretty much, essentially because a group must have as shared iommu
domain and so due to the way our PV representation works, that means the
iommu DMA window is to be exposed by a bridge that covers all the
devices of that group.
> some kind of pvDMA needs to be associated with that group, there might
> be MMIO segments and IOVA windows, etc.
The MMIO segments are mostly transparent to the guest, we just tell it
where the BARs are and it leaves them alone, at least that's how it
works under pHyp.
Currently on our qemu/vfio expriments, we do let the guest do the BAR
assignment via the emulated stuff using a hack to work around the guest
expectation that the BARs have been already setup (I can fill you on the
details if you really care but it's not very interesting). It works
because we only ever used that on setups where we had a device == a
group, but it's nasty. But in any case, because they are going to be
always in separate pages, it's not too hard for KVM to remap them
wherewver we want so MMIO is basically a non-issue.
> Effectively you want to
> transplant the entire group into the guest. Is that right? Thanks,
Well, at least we want to have a bridge for the group (it could and
probably should be a host bridge, ie, an entire PCI domain, that's a lot
easier than trying to mess around with virtual P2P bridges).
>From there, I don't care if we need to expose explicitly each device of
that group one by one. IE. It would be a nice "optimziation" to have the
ability to just specify the group and have qemu pick them all up but it
doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.
Currently, we do expose individual devices, but again, it's hacks and it
won't work on many setups etc... with horrid consequences :-) We need to
sort that before we can even think of merging that code on our side.
Cheers,
Ben.
> Alex
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH v10 0/5] [flexcan/powerpc] Add support for powerpc flexcan (freescale p1010)
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-10 3:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt, Marc Kleine-Budde, Wolfgang Grandegger,
U Bhaskar-B22300
Cc: socketcan-core, netdev, PPC list, Robin Holt
With all the patches applied, my p1010rdb works for communicating between
its two can ports and also can communicate with an external PSOC. I have
done no testing beyond compile testing on an arm system as I have no
access to an arm based system.
For the first three patches in the series, I believe they are all ready
for forwarding to David S. Miller for the netdev tree. I think patch
4 is ready for submission to the PPC85xx maintainer. Patch 5 changed
from the previous post by adding a second compatible string for the
fsl,p1010_flexcan.
Thanks,
Robin Holt
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH v10 1/5] [flexcan] Remove #include <mach/clock.h>
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-10 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt, Marc Kleine-Budde, Wolfgang Grandegger,
U Bhaskar-B22300
Cc: socketcan-core, netdev, PPC list, Robin Holt
In-Reply-To: <1312945564-6626-1-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com>
powerpc does not have a mach-####/clock.h. When testing, I found neither
arm nor powerpc needed the mach/clock.h at all so I removed it.
Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Acked-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
To: U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>
Cc: socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
---
drivers/net/can/flexcan.c | 2 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
index 1767811..586b2cd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
@@ -35,8 +35,6 @@
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/platform_device.h>
-#include <mach/clock.h>
-
#define DRV_NAME "flexcan"
/* 8 for RX fifo and 2 error handling */
--
1.7.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH v10 2/5] [flexcan] Abstract off read/write for big/little endian.
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-10 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt, Marc Kleine-Budde, Wolfgang Grandegger,
U Bhaskar-B22300
Cc: netdev, socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <1312945564-6626-1-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com>
Make flexcan driver handle register reads in the appropriate endianess.
This was a basic search and replace and then define some inlines.
Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Acked-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Acked-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
To: U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>
Cc: socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
---
drivers/net/can/flexcan.c | 140 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
index 586b2cd..68cbe52 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
@@ -190,6 +190,31 @@ static struct can_bittiming_const flexcan_bittiming_const = {
};
/*
+ * Abstract off the read/write for arm versus ppc.
+ */
+#if defined(__BIG_ENDIAN)
+static inline u32 flexcan_read(void __iomem *addr)
+{
+ return in_be32(addr);
+}
+
+static inline void flexcan_write(u32 val, void __iomem *addr)
+{
+ out_be32(addr, val);
+}
+#else
+static inline u32 flexcan_read(void __iomem *addr)
+{
+ return readl(addr);
+}
+
+static inline void flexcan_write(u32 val, void __iomem *addr)
+{
+ writel(val, addr);
+}
+#endif
+
+/*
* Swtich transceiver on or off
*/
static void flexcan_transceiver_switch(const struct flexcan_priv *priv, int on)
@@ -210,9 +235,9 @@ static inline void flexcan_chip_enable(struct flexcan_priv *priv)
struct flexcan_regs __iomem *regs = priv->base;
u32 reg;
- reg = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
reg &= ~FLEXCAN_MCR_MDIS;
- writel(reg, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(reg, ®s->mcr);
udelay(10);
}
@@ -222,9 +247,9 @@ static inline void flexcan_chip_disable(struct flexcan_priv *priv)
struct flexcan_regs __iomem *regs = priv->base;
u32 reg;
- reg = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
reg |= FLEXCAN_MCR_MDIS;
- writel(reg, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(reg, ®s->mcr);
}
static int flexcan_get_berr_counter(const struct net_device *dev,
@@ -232,7 +257,7 @@ static int flexcan_get_berr_counter(const struct net_device *dev,
{
const struct flexcan_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
struct flexcan_regs __iomem *regs = priv->base;
- u32 reg = readl(®s->ecr);
+ u32 reg = flexcan_read(®s->ecr);
bec->txerr = (reg >> 0) & 0xff;
bec->rxerr = (reg >> 8) & 0xff;
@@ -266,15 +291,15 @@ static int flexcan_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
if (cf->can_dlc > 0) {
u32 data = be32_to_cpup((__be32 *)&cf->data[0]);
- writel(data, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].data[0]);
+ flexcan_write(data, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].data[0]);
}
if (cf->can_dlc > 3) {
u32 data = be32_to_cpup((__be32 *)&cf->data[4]);
- writel(data, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].data[1]);
+ flexcan_write(data, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].data[1]);
}
- writel(can_id, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].can_id);
- writel(ctrl, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].can_ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(can_id, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].can_id);
+ flexcan_write(ctrl, ®s->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].can_ctrl);
kfree_skb(skb);
@@ -462,8 +487,8 @@ static void flexcan_read_fifo(const struct net_device *dev,
struct flexcan_mb __iomem *mb = ®s->cantxfg[0];
u32 reg_ctrl, reg_id;
- reg_ctrl = readl(&mb->can_ctrl);
- reg_id = readl(&mb->can_id);
+ reg_ctrl = flexcan_read(&mb->can_ctrl);
+ reg_id = flexcan_read(&mb->can_id);
if (reg_ctrl & FLEXCAN_MB_CNT_IDE)
cf->can_id = ((reg_id >> 0) & CAN_EFF_MASK) | CAN_EFF_FLAG;
else
@@ -473,12 +498,12 @@ static void flexcan_read_fifo(const struct net_device *dev,
cf->can_id |= CAN_RTR_FLAG;
cf->can_dlc = get_can_dlc((reg_ctrl >> 16) & 0xf);
- *(__be32 *)(cf->data + 0) = cpu_to_be32(readl(&mb->data[0]));
- *(__be32 *)(cf->data + 4) = cpu_to_be32(readl(&mb->data[1]));
+ *(__be32 *)(cf->data + 0) = cpu_to_be32(flexcan_read(&mb->data[0]));
+ *(__be32 *)(cf->data + 4) = cpu_to_be32(flexcan_read(&mb->data[1]));
/* mark as read */
- writel(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_AVAILABLE, ®s->iflag1);
- readl(®s->timer);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_AVAILABLE, ®s->iflag1);
+ flexcan_read(®s->timer);
}
static int flexcan_read_frame(struct net_device *dev)
@@ -514,17 +539,17 @@ static int flexcan_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int quota)
* The error bits are cleared on read,
* use saved value from irq handler.
*/
- reg_esr = readl(®s->esr) | priv->reg_esr;
+ reg_esr = flexcan_read(®s->esr) | priv->reg_esr;
/* handle state changes */
work_done += flexcan_poll_state(dev, reg_esr);
/* handle RX-FIFO */
- reg_iflag1 = readl(®s->iflag1);
+ reg_iflag1 = flexcan_read(®s->iflag1);
while (reg_iflag1 & FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_AVAILABLE &&
work_done < quota) {
work_done += flexcan_read_frame(dev);
- reg_iflag1 = readl(®s->iflag1);
+ reg_iflag1 = flexcan_read(®s->iflag1);
}
/* report bus errors */
@@ -534,8 +559,8 @@ static int flexcan_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int quota)
if (work_done < quota) {
napi_complete(napi);
/* enable IRQs */
- writel(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_DEFAULT, ®s->imask1);
- writel(priv->reg_ctrl_default, ®s->ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_DEFAULT, ®s->imask1);
+ flexcan_write(priv->reg_ctrl_default, ®s->ctrl);
}
return work_done;
@@ -549,9 +574,9 @@ static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
struct flexcan_regs __iomem *regs = priv->base;
u32 reg_iflag1, reg_esr;
- reg_iflag1 = readl(®s->iflag1);
- reg_esr = readl(®s->esr);
- writel(FLEXCAN_ESR_ERR_INT, ®s->esr); /* ACK err IRQ */
+ reg_iflag1 = flexcan_read(®s->iflag1);
+ reg_esr = flexcan_read(®s->esr);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_ESR_ERR_INT, ®s->esr); /* ACK err IRQ */
/*
* schedule NAPI in case of:
@@ -567,16 +592,16 @@ static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
* save them for later use.
*/
priv->reg_esr = reg_esr & FLEXCAN_ESR_ERR_BUS;
- writel(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_DEFAULT & ~FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_AVAILABLE,
- ®s->imask1);
- writel(priv->reg_ctrl_default & ~FLEXCAN_CTRL_ERR_ALL,
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_DEFAULT &
+ ~FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_AVAILABLE, ®s->imask1);
+ flexcan_write(priv->reg_ctrl_default & ~FLEXCAN_CTRL_ERR_ALL,
®s->ctrl);
napi_schedule(&priv->napi);
}
/* FIFO overflow */
if (reg_iflag1 & FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_OVERFLOW) {
- writel(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_OVERFLOW, ®s->iflag1);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_RX_FIFO_OVERFLOW, ®s->iflag1);
dev->stats.rx_over_errors++;
dev->stats.rx_errors++;
}
@@ -585,7 +610,7 @@ static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
if (reg_iflag1 & (1 << FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID)) {
/* tx_bytes is incremented in flexcan_start_xmit */
stats->tx_packets++;
- writel((1 << FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID), ®s->iflag1);
+ flexcan_write((1 << FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID), ®s->iflag1);
netif_wake_queue(dev);
}
@@ -599,7 +624,7 @@ static void flexcan_set_bittiming(struct net_device *dev)
struct flexcan_regs __iomem *regs = priv->base;
u32 reg;
- reg = readl(®s->ctrl);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->ctrl);
reg &= ~(FLEXCAN_CTRL_PRESDIV(0xff) |
FLEXCAN_CTRL_RJW(0x3) |
FLEXCAN_CTRL_PSEG1(0x7) |
@@ -623,11 +648,11 @@ static void flexcan_set_bittiming(struct net_device *dev)
reg |= FLEXCAN_CTRL_SMP;
dev_info(dev->dev.parent, "writing ctrl=0x%08x\n", reg);
- writel(reg, ®s->ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(reg, ®s->ctrl);
/* print chip status */
dev_dbg(dev->dev.parent, "%s: mcr=0x%08x ctrl=0x%08x\n", __func__,
- readl(®s->mcr), readl(®s->ctrl));
+ flexcan_read(®s->mcr), flexcan_read(®s->ctrl));
}
/*
@@ -648,10 +673,10 @@ static int flexcan_chip_start(struct net_device *dev)
flexcan_chip_enable(priv);
/* soft reset */
- writel(FLEXCAN_MCR_SOFTRST, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_MCR_SOFTRST, ®s->mcr);
udelay(10);
- reg_mcr = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg_mcr = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
if (reg_mcr & FLEXCAN_MCR_SOFTRST) {
dev_err(dev->dev.parent,
"Failed to softreset can module (mcr=0x%08x)\n",
@@ -673,12 +698,12 @@ static int flexcan_chip_start(struct net_device *dev)
* choose format C
*
*/
- reg_mcr = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg_mcr = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
reg_mcr |= FLEXCAN_MCR_FRZ | FLEXCAN_MCR_FEN | FLEXCAN_MCR_HALT |
FLEXCAN_MCR_SUPV | FLEXCAN_MCR_WRN_EN |
FLEXCAN_MCR_IDAM_C;
dev_dbg(dev->dev.parent, "%s: writing mcr=0x%08x", __func__, reg_mcr);
- writel(reg_mcr, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(reg_mcr, ®s->mcr);
/*
* CTRL
@@ -696,7 +721,7 @@ static int flexcan_chip_start(struct net_device *dev)
* (FLEXCAN_CTRL_ERR_MSK), too. Otherwise we don't get any
* warning or bus passive interrupts.
*/
- reg_ctrl = readl(®s->ctrl);
+ reg_ctrl = flexcan_read(®s->ctrl);
reg_ctrl &= ~FLEXCAN_CTRL_TSYN;
reg_ctrl |= FLEXCAN_CTRL_BOFF_REC | FLEXCAN_CTRL_LBUF |
FLEXCAN_CTRL_ERR_STATE | FLEXCAN_CTRL_ERR_MSK;
@@ -704,38 +729,39 @@ static int flexcan_chip_start(struct net_device *dev)
/* save for later use */
priv->reg_ctrl_default = reg_ctrl;
dev_dbg(dev->dev.parent, "%s: writing ctrl=0x%08x", __func__, reg_ctrl);
- writel(reg_ctrl, ®s->ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(reg_ctrl, ®s->ctrl);
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(regs->cantxfg); i++) {
- writel(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].can_ctrl);
- writel(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].can_id);
- writel(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].data[0]);
- writel(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].data[1]);
+ flexcan_write(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].can_ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].can_id);
+ flexcan_write(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].data[0]);
+ flexcan_write(0, ®s->cantxfg[i].data[1]);
/* put MB into rx queue */
- writel(FLEXCAN_MB_CNT_CODE(0x4), ®s->cantxfg[i].can_ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_MB_CNT_CODE(0x4),
+ ®s->cantxfg[i].can_ctrl);
}
/* acceptance mask/acceptance code (accept everything) */
- writel(0x0, ®s->rxgmask);
- writel(0x0, ®s->rx14mask);
- writel(0x0, ®s->rx15mask);
+ flexcan_write(0x0, ®s->rxgmask);
+ flexcan_write(0x0, ®s->rx14mask);
+ flexcan_write(0x0, ®s->rx15mask);
flexcan_transceiver_switch(priv, 1);
/* synchronize with the can bus */
- reg_mcr = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg_mcr = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
reg_mcr &= ~FLEXCAN_MCR_HALT;
- writel(reg_mcr, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(reg_mcr, ®s->mcr);
priv->can.state = CAN_STATE_ERROR_ACTIVE;
/* enable FIFO interrupts */
- writel(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_DEFAULT, ®s->imask1);
+ flexcan_write(FLEXCAN_IFLAG_DEFAULT, ®s->imask1);
/* print chip status */
dev_dbg(dev->dev.parent, "%s: reading mcr=0x%08x ctrl=0x%08x\n",
- __func__, readl(®s->mcr), readl(®s->ctrl));
+ __func__, flexcan_read(®s->mcr), flexcan_read(®s->ctrl));
return 0;
@@ -757,12 +783,12 @@ static void flexcan_chip_stop(struct net_device *dev)
u32 reg;
/* Disable all interrupts */
- writel(0, ®s->imask1);
+ flexcan_write(0, ®s->imask1);
/* Disable + halt module */
- reg = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
reg |= FLEXCAN_MCR_MDIS | FLEXCAN_MCR_HALT;
- writel(reg, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(reg, ®s->mcr);
flexcan_transceiver_switch(priv, 0);
priv->can.state = CAN_STATE_STOPPED;
@@ -854,24 +880,24 @@ static int __devinit register_flexcandev(struct net_device *dev)
/* select "bus clock", chip must be disabled */
flexcan_chip_disable(priv);
- reg = readl(®s->ctrl);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->ctrl);
reg |= FLEXCAN_CTRL_CLK_SRC;
- writel(reg, ®s->ctrl);
+ flexcan_write(reg, ®s->ctrl);
flexcan_chip_enable(priv);
/* set freeze, halt and activate FIFO, restrict register access */
- reg = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
reg |= FLEXCAN_MCR_FRZ | FLEXCAN_MCR_HALT |
FLEXCAN_MCR_FEN | FLEXCAN_MCR_SUPV;
- writel(reg, ®s->mcr);
+ flexcan_write(reg, ®s->mcr);
/*
* Currently we only support newer versions of this core
* featuring a RX FIFO. Older cores found on some Coldfire
* derivates are not yet supported.
*/
- reg = readl(®s->mcr);
+ reg = flexcan_read(®s->mcr);
if (!(reg & FLEXCAN_MCR_FEN)) {
dev_err(dev->dev.parent,
"Could not enable RX FIFO, unsupported core\n");
--
1.7.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH v10 3/5] [flexcan] Add of_match to platform_device definition.
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-10 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt, Marc Kleine-Budde, Wolfgang Grandegger,
U Bhaskar-B22300
Cc: socketcan-core, netdev, PPC list, Robin Holt
In-Reply-To: <1312945564-6626-1-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com>
On powerpc, the OpenFirmware devices are not matched without specifying
an of_match array. Introduce that array as that is used for matching
on the Freescale P1010 processor.
Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Acked-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
To: U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>
Cc: socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
---
drivers/net/can/flexcan.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
index 68cbe52..662f832 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c
@@ -1027,8 +1027,19 @@ static int __devexit flexcan_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
return 0;
}
+static struct of_device_id flexcan_of_match[] = {
+ {
+ .compatible = "fsl,flexcan",
+ },
+ {},
+};
+
static struct platform_driver flexcan_driver = {
- .driver.name = DRV_NAME,
+ .driver = {
+ .name = DRV_NAME,
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ .of_match_table = flexcan_of_match,
+ },
.probe = flexcan_probe,
.remove = __devexit_p(flexcan_remove),
};
--
1.7.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH v10 4/5] [powerpc] Add flexcan device support for p1010rdb.
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-10 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt, Marc Kleine-Budde, Wolfgang Grandegger,
U Bhaskar-B22300
Cc: netdev, socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <1312945564-6626-1-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com>
I added a simple clock source for the p1010rdb so the flexcan driver
could determine a clock frequency. The p1010 can device only has an
oscillator of system bus frequency divided by 2.
Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Acked-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
Acked-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
To: U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>
Cc: socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de,
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Cc: PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig | 2 +
arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile | 2 +
arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/clock.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p1010rdb.c | 8 +++++
4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/clock.c
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig
index 498534c..c4304ae 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig
@@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ config MPC85xx_RDB
config P1010_RDB
bool "Freescale P1010RDB"
select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
+ select HAVE_CAN_FLEXCAN if NET && CAN
+ select PPC_CLOCK if CAN_FLEXCAN
help
This option enables support for the MPC85xx RDB (P1010 RDB) board
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile
index a971b32..cc7f381 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile
@@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
#
obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += smp.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_CLOCK) += clock.o
+
obj-$(CONFIG_MPC8540_ADS) += mpc85xx_ads.o
obj-$(CONFIG_MPC8560_ADS) += mpc85xx_ads.o
obj-$(CONFIG_MPC85xx_CDS) += mpc85xx_cds.o
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/clock.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/clock.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..16fae04
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/clock.c
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright 2011 SGI, inc.
+ *
+ * This code is licensed for use under the GPL V2 as published by
+ * the Free Software Foundation.
+ */
+
+#include <linux/device.h>
+#include <linux/err.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
+
+#include <asm/clk_interface.h>
+
+#include <sysdev/fsl_soc.h>
+
+/*
+ * p1010 needs to provide a clock source for the flexcan driver. The
+ * oscillator for the p1010 processor is only ever the system clock / 2.
+ */
+
+static struct clk *mpc85xx_clk_get(struct device *dev, const char *id)
+{
+ if (!dev)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
+
+ if (!dev->of_node ||
+ !of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "fsl,flexcan"))
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
+
+ return NULL;
+}
+
+static void mpc85xx_clk_put(struct clk *clk)
+{
+ return;
+}
+
+static unsigned long mpc85xx_clk_get_rate(struct clk *clk)
+{
+ return fsl_get_sys_freq() / 2;
+}
+
+static struct clk_interface mpc85xx_clk_functions = {
+ .clk_get = mpc85xx_clk_get,
+ .clk_get_rate = mpc85xx_clk_get_rate,
+ .clk_put = mpc85xx_clk_put,
+};
+
+void __init mpc85xx_clk_init(void)
+{
+ clk_functions = mpc85xx_clk_functions;
+}
+
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p1010rdb.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p1010rdb.c
index d7387fa..5e52122 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p1010rdb.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p1010rdb.c
@@ -81,6 +81,13 @@ static void __init p1010_rdb_setup_arch(void)
printk(KERN_INFO "P1010 RDB board from Freescale Semiconductor\n");
}
+extern void mpc85xx_clk_init(void);
+
+static void __init p1010_rdb_init(void)
+{
+ mpc85xx_clk_init();
+}
+
static struct of_device_id __initdata p1010rdb_ids[] = {
{ .type = "soc", },
{ .compatible = "soc", },
@@ -111,6 +118,7 @@ define_machine(p1010_rdb) {
.name = "P1010 RDB",
.probe = p1010_rdb_probe,
.setup_arch = p1010_rdb_setup_arch,
+ .init = p1010_rdb_init,
.init_IRQ = p1010_rdb_pic_init,
#ifdef CONFIG_PCI
.pcibios_fixup_bus = fsl_pcibios_fixup_bus,
--
1.7.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH v10 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
From: Robin Holt @ 2011-08-10 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Holt, Marc Kleine-Budde, Wolfgang Grandegger,
U Bhaskar-B22300, Scott Wood
Cc: netdev, socketcan-core, Robin Holt, PPC list
In-Reply-To: <1312945564-6626-1-git-send-email-holt@sgi.com>
In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
the Documentation...fsl-flexcan.txt device tree documentation needs to
be cleaned up. The driver does not depend upon any properties other
than the required properties so we are removing the file. Additionally,
the p1010*dts* files are not following the standard for node naming in
that they have a trailing -v1.0.
Signed-off-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
To: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>,
To: U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de,
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Cc: PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt | 61 --------------------
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010rdb.dts | 8 ---
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010si.dtsi | 8 +-
3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 1a729f0..0000000
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/fsl-flexcan.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,61 +0,0 @@
-CAN Device Tree Bindings
-------------------------
-2011 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
-
-fsl,flexcan-v1.0 nodes
------------------------
-In addition to the required compatible-, reg- and interrupt-properties, you can
-also specify which clock source shall be used for the controller.
-
-CPI Clock- Can Protocol Interface Clock
- This CLK_SRC bit of CTRL(control register) selects the clock source to
- the CAN Protocol Interface(CPI) to be either the peripheral clock
- (driven by the PLL) or the crystal oscillator clock. The selected clock
- is the one fed to the prescaler to generate the Serial Clock (Sclock).
- The PRESDIV field of CTRL(control register) controls a prescaler that
- generates the Serial Clock (Sclock), whose period defines the
- time quantum used to compose the CAN waveform.
-
-Can Engine Clock Source
- There are two sources for CAN clock
- - Platform Clock It represents the bus clock
- - Oscillator Clock
-
- Peripheral Clock (PLL)
- --------------
- |
- --------- -------------
- | |CPI Clock | Prescaler | Sclock
- | |---------------->| (1.. 256) |------------>
- --------- -------------
- | |
- -------------- ---------------------CLK_SRC
- Oscillator Clock
-
-- fsl,flexcan-clock-source : CAN Engine Clock Source.This property selects
- the peripheral clock. PLL clock is fed to the
- prescaler to generate the Serial Clock (Sclock).
- Valid values are "oscillator" and "platform"
- "oscillator": CAN engine clock source is oscillator clock.
- "platform" The CAN engine clock source is the bus clock
- (platform clock).
-
-- fsl,flexcan-clock-divider : for the reference and system clock, an additional
- clock divider can be specified.
-- clock-frequency: frequency required to calculate the bitrate for FlexCAN.
-
-Note:
- - v1.0 of flexcan-v1.0 represent the IP block version for P1010 SOC.
- - P1010 does not have oscillator as the Clock Source.So the default
- Clock Source is platform clock.
-Examples:
-
- can0@1c000 {
- compatible = "fsl,flexcan-v1.0";
- reg = <0x1c000 0x1000>;
- interrupts = <48 0x2>;
- interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
- fsl,flexcan-clock-source = "platform";
- fsl,flexcan-clock-divider = <2>;
- clock-frequency = <fixed by u-boot>;
- };
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010rdb.dts b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010rdb.dts
index 6b33b73..d6a0bb2 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010rdb.dts
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010rdb.dts
@@ -169,14 +169,6 @@
};
};
- can0@1c000 {
- fsl,flexcan-clock-source = "platform";
- };
-
- can1@1d000 {
- fsl,flexcan-clock-source = "platform";
- };
-
usb@22000 {
phy_type = "utmi";
};
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010si.dtsi b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010si.dtsi
index 7f51104..20c396d 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010si.dtsi
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1010si.dtsi
@@ -141,19 +141,19 @@
};
can0@1c000 {
- compatible = "fsl,flexcan-v1.0";
+ compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan",
+ "fsl,flexcan";
reg = <0x1c000 0x1000>;
interrupts = <48 0x2>;
interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
- fsl,flexcan-clock-divider = <2>;
};
can1@1d000 {
- compatible = "fsl,flexcan-v1.0";
+ compatible = "fsl,p1010-flexcan",
+ "fsl,flexcan";
reg = <0x1d000 0x1000>;
interrupts = <61 0x2>;
interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
- fsl,flexcan-clock-divider = <2>;
};
L2: l2-cache-controller@20000 {
--
1.7.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: [PATCH 10/10] KVM: PPC: Enable the PAPR CAP for Book3S
From: Paul Mackerras @ 2011-08-10 4:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexander Graf; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, kvm, kvm-ppc
In-Reply-To: <1312907508-14599-11-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de>
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:31:48PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Now that Book3S PV mode can also run PAPR guests, we can add a PAPR cap and
> enable it for all Book3S targets. Enabling that CAP switches KVM into PAPR
> mode.
Don't we want to enable it only for 64-bit hosts? Trying to run a
PAPR guest on a 32-bit Book 3S host won't work very well, unless I am
missing something...
Regards,
Paul.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc: 85xx: separate e500 from e500mc
From: Baruch Siach @ 2011-08-10 4:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Scott Wood; +Cc: linuxppc-dev, Timur Tabi
In-Reply-To: <4E403C3C.1050001@freescale.com>
Hi Scott,
On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 02:42:52PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 04:07 AM, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > CONFIG_E500MC breaks e500/e500v2 systems. It defines L1_CACHE_SHIFT to 6, thus
> > breaking clear_pages(), probably others too.
> >
> > This patch adds a new "Processor Type" entry for e500mc, and makes e500 systems
> > depend on PPC_E500.
>
> I can see confusion coming from having CONFIG_E500 and CONFIG_PPC_E500...
I agree.
> Maybe CONFIG_PPC_E500V1_2? Or CONFIG_PPC_E500V2, with a note in the
> kconfig help that it supports e500v1 as well.
I'll go for CONFIG_PPC_E500_V1_V2. A revised patch is on the way.
baruch
--
~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH v3] powerpc: 85xx: separate e500 from e500mc
From: Baruch Siach @ 2011-08-10 5:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev; +Cc: Scott Wood, Baruch Siach, Timur Tabi
In-Reply-To: <20110810044307.GA2804@sapphire.tkos.co.il>
CONFIG_E500MC breaks e500/e500v2 systems. It defines L1_CACHE_SHIFT to 6, thus
breaking clear_pages(), probably others too.
This patch adds a new "Processor Type" entry for e500mc, and makes e500 systems
depend on PPC_E500_V1_V2.
Cc: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il>
---
Changes from v2:
* s/CONFIG_PPC_E500/CONFIG_PPC_E500_V1_V2/ to avoid confusion as
noted by Scott Wood
Changes from v1:
* Rebase on 3.1-rc1
* Remove the list of processor families from the PPC_E500 and
PPC_E500MC options description. The P20xx can be either e500v2 or
e500mc.
arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig | 13 +++++++++----
arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig
index 498534c..00d4720 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Kconfig
@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ if FSL_SOC_BOOKE
if PPC32
+if PPC_E500_V1_V2
+
config MPC8540_ADS
bool "Freescale MPC8540 ADS"
select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
@@ -171,10 +173,13 @@ config SBC8560
help
This option enables support for the Wind River SBC8560 board
+endif # PPC_E500_V1_V2
+
+if PPC_E500MC
+
config P2040_RDB
bool "Freescale P2040 RDB"
select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
- select PPC_E500MC
select PHYS_64BIT
select SWIOTLB
select MPC8xxx_GPIO
@@ -186,7 +191,6 @@ config P2040_RDB
config P3041_DS
bool "Freescale P3041 DS"
select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
- select PPC_E500MC
select PHYS_64BIT
select SWIOTLB
select MPC8xxx_GPIO
@@ -198,7 +202,6 @@ config P3041_DS
config P4080_DS
bool "Freescale P4080 DS"
select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
- select PPC_E500MC
select PHYS_64BIT
select SWIOTLB
select MPC8xxx_GPIO
@@ -207,13 +210,15 @@ config P4080_DS
help
This option enables support for the P4080 DS board
+endif # PPC_E500MC
+
endif # PPC32
config P5020_DS
bool "Freescale P5020 DS"
+ depends on PPC_E500MC
select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
select E500
- select PPC_E500MC
select PHYS_64BIT
select SWIOTLB
select MPC8xxx_GPIO
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype b/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
index e06e395..e6cb00c 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype
@@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ choice
prompt "Processor Type"
depends on PPC32
help
- There are five families of 32 bit PowerPC chips supported.
+ There are six families of 32 bit PowerPC chips supported.
The most common ones are the desktop and server CPUs (601, 603,
604, 740, 750, 74xx) CPUs from Freescale and IBM, with their
embedded 512x/52xx/82xx/83xx/86xx counterparts.
- The other embeeded parts, namely 4xx, 8xx, e200 (55xx) and e500
- (85xx) each form a family of their own that is not compatible
- with the others.
+ The other embeeded parts, namely 4xx, 8xx, e200 (55xx), e500
+ (85xx), and e500mc each form a family of their own that is not
+ compatible with the others.
If unsure, select 52xx/6xx/7xx/74xx/82xx/83xx/86xx.
@@ -24,10 +24,15 @@ config PPC_BOOK3S_32
bool "512x/52xx/6xx/7xx/74xx/82xx/83xx/86xx"
select PPC_FPU
-config PPC_85xx
- bool "Freescale 85xx"
+config PPC_E500_V1_V2
+ bool "Freescale e500v1/e500v2"
+ select PPC_85xx
select E500
+config PPC_E500MC
+ bool "Freescale e500mc/e5500"
+ select PPC_85xx
+
config PPC_8xx
bool "Freescale 8xx"
select FSL_SOC
@@ -128,15 +133,13 @@ config TUNE_CELL
config 8xx
bool
-config E500
+config PPC_85xx
+ bool
select FSL_EMB_PERFMON
select PPC_FSL_BOOK3E
- bool
-config PPC_E500MC
- bool "e500mc Support"
- select PPC_FPU
- depends on E500
+config E500
+ bool
config PPC_FPU
bool
--
1.7.5.4
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: numa: Remove double of_node_put in hot_add_node_scn_to_nid
From: Anton Blanchard @ 2011-08-10 6:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: benh, paulus; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
During memory hotplug testing, I got the following warning:
ERROR: Bad of_node_put() on /memory@0
of_node_release
kref_put
of_node_put
of_find_node_by_type
hot_add_node_scn_to_nid
hot_add_scn_to_nid
memory_add_physaddr_to_nid
...
of_find_node_by_type() loop does of_node_put for us so remove the
duplicate one inside the loop.
Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
---
Index: linux-powerpc/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
===================================================================
--- linux-powerpc.orig/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c 2011-06-06 08:07:35.148708089 +1000
+++ linux-powerpc/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c 2011-08-10 11:31:59.723379868 +1000
@@ -1214,7 +1214,6 @@ int hot_add_node_scn_to_nid(unsigned lon
break;
}
- of_node_put(memory);
if (nid >= 0)
break;
}
^ permalink raw reply
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox