[PATCH v2 06/11] ARM:stixxxx: Add STiH415 SOC support

[Srinivas KANDAGATLA]

On 10/06/13 12:15, Michal Simek wrote:

Thankyou for your comments,
> Hi,
> 
> hmm - that's a nice bug that thunderbird is not able to send this email. :-(
> Let's comment it again via gmail.
>     diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih415.dtsi
>     b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih415.dtsi
>     new file mode 100644
>     index 0000000..6dcf5b4
>     --- /dev/null
>     +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih415.dtsi
...
>     +
>     +       soc {
>     +               #address-cells = <1>;
>     +               #size-cells = <1>;
>     +               interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
>     +               ranges;
>     +               compatible      = "simple-bus";
> 
> 
> 
> Rob and Grant: what's the purpose of SoC node.
> It seems to me odd that SoC is compatible with simple-bus.

All the drivers on this SOC are based on platform bus, so we use
simple-bus, here.

>     diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih41x.dtsi
>     b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih41x.dtsi
>     new file mode 100644
>     index 0000000..7321403
>     --- /dev/null
>     +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih41x.dtsi
>     @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
>     +/ {
>     +       #address-cells = <1>;
>     +       #size-cells = <1>;
>     +
>     +       cpus {
>     +               #address-cells = <1>;
>     +               #size-cells = <0>;
>     +               cpu at 0 {
>     +                       compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
>     +                       reg = <0>;
>     +               };
>     +               cpu at 1 {
>     +                       compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
>     +                       reg = <1>;
>     +               };
>     +       };
>     +
> 
> 
> I believe your SoC also has a bus here.

It does but there is no active driver to manage it.

>     --- /dev/null
>     +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/board-dt.c
>     @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@

>     +
>     +void __init stih41x_l2x0_init(void)
>     +{
>     +       u32 way_size = 0x4;
>     +       u32 aux_ctrl;
>     +
>     +       aux_ctrl = (0x1 << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_SHARE_OVERRIDE_SHIFT) |
>     +               (0x1 << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_DATA_PREFETCH_SHIFT) |
>     +               (0x1 << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_INSTR_PREFETCH_SHIFT) |
>     +               (way_size << L2X0_AUX_CTRL_WAY_SIZE_SHIFT);
> 
> 
> 
> #include <linux/bitops.h>
> Linus Walleij would write use  BIT() here

I will use BIT() macro.

>     diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/headsmp.S
>     b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/headsmp.S
>     new file mode 100644
>     index 0000000..3dd5c04
>     --- /dev/null
>     +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/headsmp.S
>     @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
>     +/*
>     + *  arch/arm/plat-stixxxx/headsmp.S
> 

>     +       .long   pen_release
> 
> 
> check that your SoC has no option to start/reset cpus separately.
> If yes, then you shouldn't use pen_release.
> We discussed this with Russel some days ago.
No, stih41x series can't reset the cores separately.
>  
> 
>     diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/platsmp.c
>     b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/platsmp.c
>     new file mode 100644
>     index 0000000..ffc40c0
>     --- /dev/null
>     +++ b/arch/arm/mach-stixxxx/platsmp.c
>     @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
>     +/*
>     + *  arch/arm/plat-stixxxx/platsmp.c
> 
> 
> wrong.

Left over, will clean it up in next version.

>     + *  arch/arm/plat-stixxxx/platsmp.c
> 
> 
> incorrect.
Left over, will clean it up in next version.
>  
>     +extern struct smp_operations   stixxxx_smp_ops;
>     +extern void __iomem *stixxxx_scu_base_addr;
> 
> 
> Unused variable in this patch.
yes, I will remove stixxxx_scu_base_addr.

thanks,
srini