Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1392511 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Documentation: Add documentation for APM X-Gene SoC PMU DTS binding

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Documentation: Add documentation for APM X-Gene  SoC PMU DTS binding Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-05-02 23:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Documentation: Add documentation for APM X-Gene  SoC PMU DTS binding Tai Tri Nguyen <ttnguyen@apm.com> - 2016-05-02 23:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Documentation: Add documentation for APM X-Gene  SoC PMU DTS binding Tai Tri Nguyen <ttnguyen@apm.com> - 2016-05-11 01:50 +0200

#1392511 — Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Documentation: Add documentation for APM X-Gene SoC PMU DTS binding

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:31:22PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:04:53PM -0700, Tai Tri Nguyen wrote:
> > >> +Required properties for MCB subnode:
> > >> +- compatible         : Shall be "apm,xgene-pmu-mcb".
> > >> +- reg                        : First resource shall be the MCB PMU resource.
> > >> +- index                      : Instance number of the MCB PMU.
> > >> +
> > >> +Required properties for MC subnode:
> > >> +- compatible         : Shall be "apm,xgene-pmu-mc".
> > >> +- reg                        : First resource shall be the MC PMU resource.
> > >> +- index                      : Instance number of the MC PMU.
> > >
> > > Don't use indexes. You probably need phandles to the nodes these are
> > > related to.
> > >
> > > How many variations of child nodes do you expect to have? 2, 10, 50? You
> > > might want to just collapse all this down to a single node and put this
> > > information in the driver if it is fixed for each SoC and there's only a
> > > handful.
> > >
> > 
> > For each kind of PMU, for example memory controller PMU, I expect to
> > have the number of instances up to 8.
> > They are actually all independent PMU nodes and have their own CSR memory bases.
> > The indexes are used for exposing the devices to perf user only. It
> > doesn't have an impact on the programming model.
> > Mark also had the same concern.
> 
> Regardless, I'll need an ack from Rob or Mark before I can merge this.

I still have a concern with this. Needing an index to expose to the user 
is generally not a valid reason. That's OS specific and therefore 
doesn't belong in DT.

Rob

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1392531

Hi Rob,

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:31:22PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:04:53PM -0700, Tai Tri Nguyen wrote:
>> > >> +Required properties for MCB subnode:
>> > >> +- compatible         : Shall be "apm,xgene-pmu-mcb".
>> > >> +- reg                        : First resource shall be the MCB PMU resource.
>> > >> +- index                      : Instance number of the MCB PMU.
>> > >> +
>> > >> +Required properties for MC subnode:
>> > >> +- compatible         : Shall be "apm,xgene-pmu-mc".
>> > >> +- reg                        : First resource shall be the MC PMU resource.
>> > >> +- index                      : Instance number of the MC PMU.
>> > >
>> > > Don't use indexes. You probably need phandles to the nodes these are
>> > > related to.
>> > >
>> > > How many variations of child nodes do you expect to have? 2, 10, 50? You
>> > > might want to just collapse all this down to a single node and put this
>> > > information in the driver if it is fixed for each SoC and there's only a
>> > > handful.
>> > >
>> >
>> > For each kind of PMU, for example memory controller PMU, I expect to
>> > have the number of instances up to 8.
>> > They are actually all independent PMU nodes and have their own CSR memory bases.
>> > The indexes are used for exposing the devices to perf user only. It
>> > doesn't have an impact on the programming model.
>> > Mark also had the same concern.
>>
>> Regardless, I'll need an ack from Rob or Mark before I can merge this.
>
> I still have a concern with this. Needing an index to expose to the user
> is generally not a valid reason. That's OS specific and therefore
> doesn't belong in DT.
>
> Rob

I can use device name here. However, the perf event names will be
different between DT and ACPI which I want to avoid.
And the names don't look good at all.
Also, specifically for MC and MCB PMUs, the indexes are compared
against the active MC/MCB mask to find out whether they are populated
or not.
Without using the index property, I will also need a mapping function
of physical device addresses and their physical ids.

Thanks,
-- 
Tai

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1398594

Hi Rob/Mark,

Do you have any more comments, please?

Thanks,
Tai

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Tai Tri Nguyen <ttnguyen@apm.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:31:22PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:04:53PM -0700, Tai Tri Nguyen wrote:
>>> > >> +Required properties for MCB subnode:
>>> > >> +- compatible         : Shall be "apm,xgene-pmu-mcb".
>>> > >> +- reg                        : First resource shall be the MCB PMU resource.
>>> > >> +- index                      : Instance number of the MCB PMU.
>>> > >> +
>>> > >> +Required properties for MC subnode:
>>> > >> +- compatible         : Shall be "apm,xgene-pmu-mc".
>>> > >> +- reg                        : First resource shall be the MC PMU resource.
>>> > >> +- index                      : Instance number of the MC PMU.
>>> > >
>>> > > Don't use indexes. You probably need phandles to the nodes these are
>>> > > related to.
>>> > >
>>> > > How many variations of child nodes do you expect to have? 2, 10, 50? You
>>> > > might want to just collapse all this down to a single node and put this
>>> > > information in the driver if it is fixed for each SoC and there's only a
>>> > > handful.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > For each kind of PMU, for example memory controller PMU, I expect to
>>> > have the number of instances up to 8.
>>> > They are actually all independent PMU nodes and have their own CSR memory bases.
>>> > The indexes are used for exposing the devices to perf user only. It
>>> > doesn't have an impact on the programming model.
>>> > Mark also had the same concern.
>>>
>>> Regardless, I'll need an ack from Rob or Mark before I can merge this.
>>
>> I still have a concern with this. Needing an index to expose to the user
>> is generally not a valid reason. That's OS specific and therefore
>> doesn't belong in DT.
>>
>> Rob
>
> I can use device name here. However, the perf event names will be
> different between DT and ACPI which I want to avoid.
> And the names don't look good at all.
> Also, specifically for MC and MCB PMUs, the indexes are compared
> against the active MC/MCB mask to find out whether they are populated
> or not.
> Without using the index property, I will also need a mapping function
> of physical device addresses and their physical ids.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Tai



-- 
Tai

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web