Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: provide mechanism for drivers to access L2 registers

Neil Leeder
2016-05-26T20:38:55Z

On 5/26/2016 12:48 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 24 May 12:54 PDT 2016, Neil Leeder wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 5/24/2016 07:23 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 02:22:59PM -0400, Neil Leeder wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 5/23/2016 01:25 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 03:13:07PM -0400, Neil Leeder wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Leeder <nleeder@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig | 9 +++++
>>>>>> drivers/soc/qcom/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>>> drivers/soc/qcom/l2-accessors.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> include/linux/soc/qcom/l2-accessors.h | 27 ++++++++++++++
>>>>>> 4 files changed, 103 insertions(+)
>>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/l2-accessors.c
>>>>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/soc/qcom/l2-accessors.h
>>>>>
>>>>> These are awfully generic file names (and function names). Which SoCs
>>>>> does this apply to?
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be good to give these more specific names.
>>>>
>>>> It's under soc/qcom, and dependent on ARCH_QCOM and (in v2) also on ARM64. It applies to all QCOM ARM64 SoCs.
>>>
>>> Per Christopher's comment, it sounds like this applies to QDF24xx.
>>>
>>> Given that the code uses IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED system registers, I
>>> presume that this does not apply to MSM8916 which uses Cortex-A53, for
>>> example (though perhaps it does, and I am mistaken).
>>>
>>>> Given that it can only be used in a QCOM driver, and the include path has qcom in it, I'd
>>>> prefer not to add redundancy by adding another qcom in there.
>>>
>>> I'm not asking for another "qcom", but simply the SoC variant or family
>>> (e.g. "qdf24xx" would be fine).
>>>
>>
>> It applies to all ARMv8 SoCs with QCOM processors in them. So QDF24xx
>> and mobile 820, but not SoCs with ARM processors in them such as
>> MSM8916. So neither msm_ nor qdf_ are accurate prefixes.
>
> What's the code name for the SoC in QDF24xx? The 820 is Kryo, is it the
> same core in QDF24xx or does that have some other name.
>
> We should try to pick something adding value, not adding another generic
> thing.

There is currently no public name for the QDF24xx core.

>
>> As Timur pointed out, the majority of source files in drivers/soc/qcom
>> don't have any prefix, which is a reason why I didn't include one.
>>
>
> There's no reason to add a generic "qcom" to the qcom folder, if
> anything we should drop the "qcom" prefix of the only one in there.
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>

Neil

--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.