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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1460331 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer

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 v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT  support in arm_arch_timer Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com> - 2016-08-11 11:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT  support in arm_arch_timer Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> - 2016-08-11 12:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT  support in arm_arch_timer Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> - 2016-08-11 12:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT  support in arm_arch_timer Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> - 2016-08-11 13:00 +0200
          Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT  support in arm_arch_timer Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> - 2016-08-17 21:10 +0200
            Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT  support in arm_arch_timer Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org> - 2016-08-18 09:50 +0200

#1460331 — Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] acpi, clocksource: add GTDT driver and GTDT support in arm_arch_timer

Hi Fu,

Do you mind if I send IORT series where new drivers/acpi/arm64 directory 
would be introduced in first place ? This means your GTDT set would 
depend on IORT.

Thanks,
Tomasz

On 26.07.2016 14:19, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>
> This patchset:
>     (1)Preparation for adding GTDT support in arm_arch_timer:
>         1. Move some enums and marcos to header file;
>         2. Add a new enum for spi type;
>         3. Improve printk relevant code.
>
>     (2)Introduce ACPI GTDT parser: drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c
>     Parse all kinds of timer in GTDT table of ACPI:arch timer,
>     memory-mapped timer and SBSA Generic Watchdog timer.
>     This driver can help to simplify all the relevant timer drivers,
>     and separate all the ACPI GTDT knowledge from them.
>
>     (3)Simplify ACPI code for arm_arch_timer
>
>     (4)Add GTDT support for ARM memory-mapped timer
>
> This patchset has been tested on the following platforms:
>     (1)ARM Foundation v8 model
>
> Changelog:
> V10: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/26/
>      Drop the "readq" patch.
>      Rebase to latest Linux 4.7.
>
> V9: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/25/345
>     Improve pr_err message in acpi gtdt driver.
>     Update Commit message for 7/9
>     shorten the irq mapping function name
>     Improve GTDT driver for memory-mapped timer
>
> v8: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/19/660
>     Improve "pr_fmt(fmt)" definition: add "ACPI" in front of "GTDT",
>     and also improve printk message.
>     Simplify is_timer_block and is_watchdog.
>     Merge acpi_gtdt_desc_init and gtdt_arch_timer_init into acpi_gtdt_init();
>     Delete __init in include/linux/acpi.h for GTDT API
>     Make ARM64 select GTDT.
>     Delete "#include <linux/module.h>" from acpi_gtdt.c
>     Simplify GT block parse code.
>
> v7: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/13/769
>     Move the GTDT driver to drivers/acpi/arm64
>     Add add the ARM64-specific ACPI Support maintainers in MAINTAINERS
>     Merge 3 patches of GTDT parser driver.
>     Fix the for_each_platform_timer bug.
>
> v6: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/29/580
>     split the GTDT driver to 4 parts: basic, arch_timer, memory-mapped timer,
>     and SBSA Generic Watchdog timer
>     Improve driver by suggestions and example code from Daniel Lezcano
>
> v5: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/24/356
>     Sorting out all patches, simplify the API of GTDT driver:
>     GTDT driver just fills the data struct for arm_arch_timer driver.
>
> v4: https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-acpi/2016-March/006667.html
>     Delete the kvm relevant patches
>     Separate two patches for sorting out the code for arm_arch_timer.
>     Improve irq info export code to allow missing irq info in GTDT table.
>
> v3: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/2/1/658
>     Improve GTDT driver code:
>       (1)improve pr_* by defining pr_fmt(fmt)
>       (2)simplify gtdt_sbsa_gwdt_init
>       (3)improve gtdt_arch_timer_data_init, if table is NULL, it will try
>       to get GTDT table.
>     Move enum ppi_nr to arm_arch_timer.h, and add enum spi_nr.
>     Add arm_arch_timer get ppi from DT and GTDT support for kvm.
>
> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/2/10
>     Rebase to latest kernel version(4.4-rc3).
>     Fix the bug about the config problem,
>     use CONFIG_ACPI_GTDT instead of CONFIG_ACPI in arm_arch_timer.c
>
> v1: The first upstreaming version: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/28/553
>
> Fu Wei (8):
>   clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: Move enums and defines to header
>     file
>   clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: Add a new enum for spi type
>   clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: Improve printk relevant code
>   acpi/arm64: Add GTDT table parse driver
>   clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: Simplify ACPI support code.
>   acpi/arm64: Add memory-mapped timer support in GTDT driver
>   clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: Add GTDT support for memory-mapped
>     timer
>   acpi/arm64: Add SBSA Generic Watchdog support in GTDT driver
>
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig                   |   1 +
>  drivers/acpi/Kconfig                 |   5 +
>  drivers/acpi/Makefile                |   1 +
>  drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig           |   5 +
>  drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile          |   1 +
>  drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c       | 309 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/clocksource/Kconfig          |   2 +-
>  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 225 +++++++++++++++++--------
>  drivers/watchdog/Kconfig             |   1 +
>  include/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.h |  32 ++++
>  include/linux/acpi.h                 |   7 +
>  11 files changed, 518 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/arm64/Kconfig
>  create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/arm64/Makefile
>  create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/arm64/acpi_gtdt.c
>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1460369

Hi,

On 2016/8/11 17:37, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> Hi Fu,
>
> Do you mind if I send IORT series where new drivers/acpi/arm64 directory
> would be introduced in first place ? This means your GTDT set would
> depend on IORT.

I think it's reasonable as the IORT for ITS is the key device enablement
for PCI MSI. I talked to Fuwei offline and he is fine with it.

But both the GTDT patchset and IORT are in good shape now, can we
targeting both of them for 4.9 kernel (since all go via tip tree)?

Thanks
Hanjun

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

#1460379

Hi Hanjun, Tomasz,

On 11 August 2016 at 18:15, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2016/8/11 17:37, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>>
>> Hi Fu,
>>
>> Do you mind if I send IORT series where new drivers/acpi/arm64 directory
>> would be introduced in first place ? This means your GTDT set would
>> depend on IORT.
>
>
> I think it's reasonable as the IORT for ITS is the key device enablement
> for PCI MSI. I talked to Fuwei offline and he is fine with it.

That's no problem at all, will do.

Can I do this:
(1)apply Tomasz's v8 patchset on the master branch of upstream kernel
(2)rebase my v10 on the top of Tomasz's v8
(3)git format-patch as v11, repost it

Is that OK for everyone? :-)

>
> But both the GTDT patchset and IORT are in good shape now, can we
> targeting both of them for 4.9 kernel (since all go via tip tree)?
>
> Thanks
> Hanjun



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat

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

#1460398

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 06:22:03PM +0800, Fu Wei wrote:
> Hi Hanjun, Tomasz,
> 
> On 11 August 2016 at 18:15, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2016/8/11 17:37, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Fu,
> >>
> >> Do you mind if I send IORT series where new drivers/acpi/arm64 directory
> >> would be introduced in first place ? This means your GTDT set would
> >> depend on IORT.
> >
> >
> > I think it's reasonable as the IORT for ITS is the key device enablement
> > for PCI MSI. I talked to Fuwei offline and he is fine with it.
> 
> That's no problem at all, will do.
> 
> Can I do this:
> (1)apply Tomasz's v8 patchset on the master branch of upstream kernel
> (2)rebase my v10 on the top of Tomasz's v8
> (3)git format-patch as v11, repost it
> 
> Is that OK for everyone? :-)

I do not think you need a v11 just to remove the drivers/acpi/arm64
directory creation, you need to get Daniel/Thomas review/ack on
the respective patches though, I do not see the point of churning
out another series just because drivers/acpi/arm64 is now created
in the IORT patch series. If v10 is ok you will rebase it on top of
Tomasz's series and mention the dependency in the respective pull
request.

If there is need for a v11 following Daniel/Thomas review yes,
you can proceed as above.

Lorenzo

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

#1464722

Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> I do not think you need a v11 just to remove the drivers/acpi/arm64
> directory creation, you need to get Daniel/Thomas review/ack on
> the respective patches though, I do not see the point of churning
> out another series just because drivers/acpi/arm64 is now created
> in the IORT patch series. If v10 is ok you will rebase it on top of
> Tomasz's series and mention the dependency in the respective pull
> request.
>
> If there is need for a v11 following Daniel/Thomas review yes,
> you can proceed as above.

What's the latest on this patchset?  I really want them in 4.9.  Is 
everything queued up, or are still issues that need to be resolved.

Who will be merging these patches?

-- 
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc.  Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

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

#1464978

Hi Timur,

On 18 August 2016 at 03:01, Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>
>> I do not think you need a v11 just to remove the drivers/acpi/arm64
>> directory creation, you need to get Daniel/Thomas review/ack on
>> the respective patches though, I do not see the point of churning
>> out another series just because drivers/acpi/arm64 is now created
>> in the IORT patch series. If v10 is ok you will rebase it on top of
>> Tomasz's series and mention the dependency in the respective pull
>> request.
>>
>> If there is need for a v11 following Daniel/Thomas review yes,
>> you can proceed as above.
>
>
> What's the latest on this patchset?  I really want them in 4.9.  Is
> everything queued up, or are still issues that need to be resolved.

we are trying to let Tomasz's series be merged first, then this patch set
will be rebased on the top of it.

If everyone is OK with this patchset, I guess  "in 4.9" is not a problem.

I don't see any suggestion and comment for now, will keep my eyes on it.

>
> Who will be merging these patches?

I think the clocksource maintainer will take care of it, and  GTDT patch
has got Rafael's ACK.

>
> --
> Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
> Technologies, Inc.  Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
> Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web