[PATCH v5 5/6] Documentation: dt-bindings: Add binding info for X-Gene QMTM UIO driver

[Ankit Jindal]

On 8 December 2014 at 22:45, Rob Herring <robherring2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Ankit Jindal <ankit.jindal at linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 18 November 2014 at 18:40, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 18 November 2014 14:59:54 Ankit Jindal wrote:
>>>> On 17 November 2014 16:47, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>>>> > On Monday 17 November 2014 16:06:11 Ankit Jindal wrote:
>>>> >> +
>>>> >> +       qmtm1_uio: qmtm_uio at 1f200000 {
>>>> >> +               compatible = "apm,xgene-qmtm";
>>>> >> +               status = "disabled";
>>>> >> +               reg = <0x0 0x1f200000 0x0 0x10000>,
>>>> >> +                     <0x0 0x1b000000 0x0 0x400000>;
>>>> >> +               reg-names = "csr", "fabric";
>>>> >> +               qpool-memory = <&qmtm1_uio_qpool>;
>>>> >> +               clocks = <&qmtm1clk 0>;
>>>> >> +               num-queues = <0x400>;
>>>> >> +               devid = <1>;
>>>> >> +       };
>>>> >> +
>>>> >
>>>> > To make my previous review comments clearer:
>>>> >
>>>> > NAK
>>>> >
>>>> > Do not create device nodes that are meant for a specific use case in
>>>> > software and that are not usable for the common case. I don't think
>>>> > it makes any sense to keep on submitting a UIO driver for this until
>>>> > we have a proper network driver that uses this so we can make sure we
>>>> > have a working binding.
>
> +1
>
>>>> The dataplane frameworks like OpenDataPlane etc, need to have access
>>>> to complete subsystem from the user space. Hence, we would like to
>>>> have this driver and some other UIO drivers to be the part of kernel
>>>> to have data plane frameworks working on our platform.
>>>
>>> Please work with the people that do the in-kernel QMTM driver to come
>>> up with a common binding then.
>> Thanks Arnd, I have synced with them, and in future our dt bindings
>> for this device is going to be inline with the one mentioned in the
>> patchset.
>
> What does "in the future" mean? Is there already a QMTM binding? If
> so, you need to figure out how to either align with it or deprecate
> it. This patch at a minimum needs to be fixed to not refer to UIO.

There is no QMTM dt binding as of now, and the kernel QMTM driver will
also use the same dt binding.
I will remove all references to the UIO from this patch, and move this
binding under the misc folder.

>
> Rob

Thanks,
Ankit