Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1325456
| From | Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform |
| Date | 2016-02-03 14:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qY5YJ-2CV-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qXNSa-72M-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qXQ3E-93-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qY5Fq-2vi-63@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wednesday 03 February 2016 13:24:10 Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel wrote:
> > Typically we treat those special registers as part of the device itself
> > and have a single device node for the AHCI controller and that one.
> >
> > What is your reason for doing it differently here?
>
> Two reasons
>
> 1- The hardware is like a proper split rather than additional hidden registers in
> the same memory space.
>
> 2- Tons of devices in the field have the following DT node built in the bootloader.
>
> uctl@118006c000000 {
> compatible = "cavium,octeon-7130-sata-uctl";
> reg = <0x11800 0x6c000000 0x0 0x100>;
> ...
> sata: sata@16c0000000000 {
> compatible = "cavium,octeon-7130-ahci";
> reg = <0x16c00 0x00000000 0x0 0x200>;
> ...
> };
> };
>
> The patch suggests a way to handle this.
>
Ok, fair enough. Also, you write in the binding that this is a bus
bridge, so this indeed matches what the hardware does, and that's ok.
Does the bus bridge actually translate the entire 64-bit CPU MMIO space,
or is it possible that it only handles one device (or a couple of
them) with a fairly limited space?
Maybe it's better to represent it as a #address-cells=<1> in the
example, and have the child device appear at address 0 in there.
For the machines that already ship a DT, that would not matter though,
it works either way.
Arnd
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel <Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com> - 2016-02-02 19:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com> - 2016-02-02 19:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-02 21:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel <Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com> - 2016-02-03 14:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-03 14:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel <Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com> - 2016-02-03 15:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-03 16:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel <Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com> - 2016-02-03 17:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-03 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-03 14:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v6] SATA: OCTEON: support SATA on OCTEON platform Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel <Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com> - 2016-02-03 15:50 +0100
csiph-web