[PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM

Tue Sep 15 22:11:24 PDT 2015

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 12:14 PM
> To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534
> Cc: Tang Yuantian-B29983; devicetree at vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-
> dev at lists.ozlabs.org; robh+dt at kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> Wang Huan-B18965; Jin Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM
> 
> On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 22:18 -0500, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote:
> > Hi Scott,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wang Dongsheng-B40534
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 10:44 AM
> > > To: Wood Scott-B07421; Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org;
> > > robh+dt at kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; Wang Huan-
> > > B18965; Jin
> > > Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336
> > > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 10:38 AM
> > > > To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > > > Cc: Wang Dongsheng-B40534; devicetree at vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-
> > > > dev at lists.ozlabs.org; robh+dt at kernel.org;
> > > > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> > > > Wang Huan-B18965; Jin Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 21:35 -0500, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 10:32 AM
> > > > > > To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534 <Dongsheng.Wang at freescale.com>
> > > > > > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org;
> > > > > > robh+dt at kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; Wang
> > > > > > robh+Huan-
> > > > > > B18965 <alison.wang at freescale.com>; Jin Zhengxiong-R64188
> > > > > > <Jason.Jin at freescale.com>; Zhao Chenhui-B35336
> > > > > > <chenhui.zhao at freescale.com>; Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > > > > > <Yuantian.Tang at freescale.com>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 21:30 -0500, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Scott,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 10:19 AM
> > > > > > > > To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534
> > > > > > > > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org;
> > > > > > > > linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org;
> > > > > > > > robh+dt at kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> > > > > > > > robh+Wang
> > > > > > > > robh+Huan-
> > > > > > > > B18965; Jin
> > > > > > > > Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336; Tang
> > > > > > > > Yuantian-B29983
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 21:15 -0500, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi Scott,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 7:57 AM
> > > > > > > > > > To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org;
> > > > > > > > > > linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org;
> > > > > > > > > > robh+dt at kernel.org;
> > > > > > > > > > robh+linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;
> > > > > > > > > > robh+Wang
> > > > > > > > > > robh+Huan-
> > > > > > > > > > B18965; Jin
> > > > > > > > > > Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336; Tang
> > > > > > > > > > Yuantian-B29983
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 16:55 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > +* Freescale RCPM Wakeup Source Device Tree Bindings
> > > > > > > > > > > +-------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > +Required rcpm-wakeup property should be added to a
> > > > > > > > > > > +device node if the
> > > > > > > > > > > device
> > > > > > > > > > > +can be used as a wakeup source.
> > > > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > > > +  - rcpm-wakeup: The value of the property consists
> > > > > > > > > > > + of 3
> > > > > > > > > > > cells.
> > > > > > > > > > > + The
> > > > > > > > > > > first
> > > > > > > > > > > cell
> > > > > > > > > > > +     is a pointer to the rcpm node, the second cell
> > > > > > > > > > > + is the bit mask
> > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > +     should be set in IPPDEXPCR0, and the last cell
> > > > > > > > > > > + is for
> > > > > > > > > > > IPPDEXPCR1.
> > > > > > > > > > > +     Note: If the platform has no IPPDEXPCR1
> > > > > > > > > > > + register, put a zero
> > > > > > > > > > > here.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What if a future platform has more than two of these
> > > > > > > > > > registers?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Those registers are only used for wakeup device, we have
> > > > > > > > > a lot of available bit for feature. For example, In
> > > > > > > > > LS1021a platform only 7bits has used in the registers,
> > > > > > > > > and 57bits is
> > > reserved.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Still, it'd be better to for the rcpm node to advertise
> > > > > > > > the number of cells it expects.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For the foreseeable future it should be enough to use, even
> > > > > > > if not enough to use in the future at that time we can
> > > > > > > update the binding.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's the whole point.  Device tree is stable ABI.  Updating
> > > > > > it later to not be fixed to two cells would be a lot harder
> > > > > > than getting it right from the beginning.  Putting the number
> > > > > > of cells in the phandle target is a standard device tree idiom.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I agree with you. But what's the point a SOC has more than 64
> > > > > wakeup source?
> > > >
> > > > I don't know.  Hardware people do strange things sometimes.  They
> > > > might not want to reuse bits they once used for something on some
> > > > other chip, or they might have some encoding scheme in mind that
> > > > results in the bits not being packed as tightly as possible, or
> > > > there may be some big array of similar devices...
> > > >
> > > > What's the point of skipping this part of the
> > > > phandle-plus-arguments idiom?
> > >
> > > Fine, I will add a property in rcpm node to describe the number of
> > > register.
> > >
> >
> > How about the following modify? If okay for you I will fix in next version.
> >
> > Required properites:
> >    - reg : Offset and length of the register set of RCPM block.
> > +  - fsl,rcpm-wakeup-cell-num : The number of cell in rcpm-wakeup property.
> >
> >         rcpm:  global-utilities at e2000{
> >                 compatible = "fsl,t4240-rcpm", "fsl,qoriq-rcpm-2.0";
> >                 reg = <0xe2000 0x1000>;
> > +               fsl,rcpm-wakeup-cell-num = <2>;
> >         };
> 
> OK, though "fsl,#rcpm-wakeup-cells" would be more idiomatic.

OK, thanks. Will fix it in next version.

Regards,
-Dongsheng