[RFC][PATCH] bcmai: introduce AI driver

[Arend van Spriel]

On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 19:27:11 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011/4/8 Arend van Spriel <arend at broadcom.com>:
>> On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 18:56:13 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5 at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 2011/4/6 Arend van Spriel <arend at broadcom.com>:
>>>>
>>>> 3. Device identification
>>>>
>>>> The cores are identified by manufacturer, core id and revision in your
>>>> patch. I would not use the revision because 4 out of 5 times a  
>>>> revision
>>>> change does indicate a hardware change but no change in programming
>>>> interface. The enumeration data does contain a more selective field
>>>> indicating the core class (4 bits following the core identifier). I
>>>> suggest
>>>> to replace the revision field by this class field.
>>>
>>> Could you say something more about *class*, please? For my BCM43224 it
>>> seems to be 0x0. WIll check BCM4313 in a moment.
>>>
>>
>> In principal the manufacturer id is unique (defined/assigned by JEDEC
>> www.jedec.org) and the chip id and chip class are defined by the
>> manufacturer. So I can only indicate what classes Broadcom uses in
>> combination with the manufacturer id BRCM, ARM and MIPS.
>>
>> /* Component Classes */
>> #define CC_SIM                  0
>> #define CC_EROM                 1
>> #define CC_CORESIGHT            9
>> #define CC_VERIF                0xb
>> #define CC_OPTIMO               0xd
>> #define CC_GEN                  0xe
>> #define CC_PRIMECELL            0xf
>>
>> Looking at this it seems strange that you see a class value of 0x0. It  
>> may
>> be rarely used or for non-production chips only (for simulation, chip
>> bringup) which may require additional (debug) functions. So question is
>> whether you will need it, but it is specified by ARM and it is up to
>> manufacturers to use it. So I it is better to be safe than sorry and  
>> have
>> this in the device id.
>
> OK, thanks. I'm compiling kernel with patch V2 right now. Of course
> class included.
>

Great. I tried to apply you patch on my kernel tree but it did not apply.  
Which tree are you using. linux-next, wireless-next?

Gr. AvS
-- 
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the  
human
mind to correlate all its contents." - "The Call of Cthulhu"