linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com>
To: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"viresh.kumar@linaro.org" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	"rob.herring@calxeda.com" <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
	"rjw@sisk.pl" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
	"grant.likely@linaro.org" <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	"cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" <cpufreq@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"olof@lixom.net" <olof@lixom.net>,
	"gregory.clement@free-electrons.com" 
	<gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>,
	"shawn.guo@linaro.org" <shawn.guo@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/11] ARM: DT/kernel: define ARM specific arch_of_get_cpu_node
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:16:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51E6A756.1000300@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51E50C59.50900@arm.com>

On 16/07/13 10:03, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> On 15/07/13 20:10, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On 07/15/2013 05:22 AM, Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com wrote:
>>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com>
>>>
>>> CPU subsystem now provides architecture specific hook to retrieve the
>>> of_node. Most of the cpu DT node parsing and initialisation is contained
>>> in devtree.c. It's better to contain all CPU device node parsing there.
>>>
>>> arch_of_get_cpu_node is mainly used to assign cpu->of_node when CPUs get
>>> registered. This patch overrides the defination of the same. It can also
>>> act as the helper function in pre-SMP/early initialisation stages to
>>> retrieve CPU device node pointers in logical ordering.
>>>
>>> This mainly helps to avoid replication of the code doing CPU node parsing
>>> and physical(MPIDR) to logical mapping.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> +struct device_node * __init arch_of_get_cpu_node(int cpu)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct device_node *cpun, *cpus;
>>> +	const u32 *cell;
>>> +	u64 hwid;
>>> +	int ac;
>>> +
>>> +	cpus = of_find_node_by_path("/cpus");
>>> +	if (WARN(!cpus, "Missing cpus node, bailing out\n"))
>>> +		return NULL;
>>> +
>>> +	if (WARN_ON(of_property_read_u32(cpus, "#address-cells", &ac)))
>>> +		ac = of_n_addr_cells(cpus);
>>> +
>>> +	for_each_child_of_node(cpus, cpun) {
>>> +		if (of_node_cmp(cpun->type, "cpu"))
>>> +			continue;
>>> +		cell = of_get_property(cpun, "reg", NULL);
>>> +		if (WARN(!cell, "%s: missing reg property\n", cpun->full_name))
>>> +			continue;
>>> +
>>> +		hwid = of_read_number(cell, ac);
>>> +		if ((hwid & MPIDR_HWID_BITMASK) == cpu_logical_map(cpu))
>>
>> Most of this function is not ARM specific, so it would be nice if we
>> could shrink the arch specific part down to just this match. A default
>> match of reg == logical cpu number might be useful.
>>
> I completely agree, in fact that was my initial idea too.
> 
> But when I had a look at powerpc implementation of "of_get_cpu_node" in
> arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c, it looked like PPC is using some
> compatibles(e.g. ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s) which are not specified in
> ePAPR. I am not sure is that's allowed or not, if allowed then we can't
> have generic of_get_cpu_node with just arch specific hwid matching function.

I meant property names not compatibles. Looks like PPC and SPARC seem to
use non-standard property names like "cpuid",
"ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s" instead of single "reg" property for all
cpus/threads

Since the cpufreq driver doesn't depend on those properties, I moved
arch_of_get_cpu_node to OF/DT core in v2.

Regards,
Sudeep


  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-17 14:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-15 10:22 [RFC PATCH 00/11] ARM: DT: update cpu device of_node Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] driver/core: cpu: initialize of_node in cpu's device struture Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-16  6:27   ` Viresh Kumar
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] ARM: DT/kernel: define ARM specific arch_of_get_cpu_node Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 19:10   ` Rob Herring
2013-07-16  6:29     ` Viresh Kumar
2013-07-16  9:03     ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-17 14:16       ` Sudeep KarkadaNagesha [this message]
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] ARM: topology: remove hwid/MPIDR dependency from cpu_capacity Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] ARM: mvebu: remove device tree parsing for cpu nodes Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] drivers/bus: arm-cci: avoid parsing DT for cpu device nodes Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] cpufreq: imx6q-cpufreq: remove device tree parsing for cpu nodes Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-16  1:22   ` Shawn Guo
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: " Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-16  1:26   ` Shawn Guo
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] cpufreq: highbank-cpufreq: " Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] cpufreq: spear-cpufreq: " Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] cpufreq: kirkwood-cpufreq: " Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-15 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] cpufreq: arm_big_little: " Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha
2013-07-16  6:31 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] ARM: DT: update cpu device of_node Viresh Kumar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=51E6A756.1000300@arm.com \
    --to=sudeep.karkadanagesha@arm.com \
    --cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
    --cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
    --cc=shawn.guo@linaro.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).