| Message ID | IA1PR20MB4953B8AC5CB8F8165A09D118BBB7A@IA1PR20MB4953.namprd20.prod.outlook.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Change the sg2042 timer layout to fit aclint format | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| robh/checkpatch | warning | total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 26 lines checked |
| robh/patch-applied | success | |
| robh/dtbs-check | warning | build log |
| robh/dt-meta-schema | success |
On 17/11/2023 06:07, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > The timer registers of aclint don't follow the clint layout and can > be mapped on any different offset. As sg2042 uses separated timer > and mswi for its clint, it should follow the aclint spec and have > separated registers. > > The previous patch introduced a new type of T-HEAD aclint timer which > has clint timer layout. Although it has the clint timer layout, it > should follow the aclint spec and uses the separated mtime and mtimecmp > regs. So a ABI change is needed to make the timer fit the aclint spec. > > To make T-HEAD aclint timer more closer to the aclint spec, use > regs-names to represent the mtimecmp register, which can avoid hack > for unsupport mtime register of T-HEAD aclint timer. > I don't understand this reasoning. You had one entry, you still have one entry. Adding reg-names (not regs-names) does not change it. Best regards, Krzysztof
> >On 17/11/2023 06:07, Inochi Amaoto wrote: >> The timer registers of aclint don't follow the clint layout and can >> be mapped on any different offset. As sg2042 uses separated timer >> and mswi for its clint, it should follow the aclint spec and have >> separated registers. >> >> The previous patch introduced a new type of T-HEAD aclint timer which >> has clint timer layout. Although it has the clint timer layout, it >> should follow the aclint spec and uses the separated mtime and mtimecmp >> regs. So a ABI change is needed to make the timer fit the aclint spec. >> >> To make T-HEAD aclint timer more closer to the aclint spec, use >> regs-names to represent the mtimecmp register, which can avoid hack >> for unsupport mtime register of T-HEAD aclint timer. >> > >I don't understand this reasoning. You had one entry, you still have one >entry. Adding reg-names (not regs-names) does not change it. > If no "reg-names", all the register of ACLINT should be defined. However, T-HEAD aclint timer of sg2042 only supports mtimecmp register. If no extra prompt is provided for the SBI, it will fail to recognize aclint timer registers when parsing the aclint node with one reg entry. There is another way to avoid this by using an empty entry to identify unsupported mtime, but Conor have already rejected this. See [1]. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231114-skedaddle-precinct-66c8897227bb@squawk/ [1]
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 08:30:21PM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > > > >On 17/11/2023 06:07, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > >> The timer registers of aclint don't follow the clint layout and can > >> be mapped on any different offset. As sg2042 uses separated timer > >> and mswi for its clint, it should follow the aclint spec and have > >> separated registers. > >> > >> The previous patch introduced a new type of T-HEAD aclint timer which > >> has clint timer layout. Although it has the clint timer layout, it > >> should follow the aclint spec and uses the separated mtime and mtimecmp > >> regs. So a ABI change is needed to make the timer fit the aclint spec. > >> > >> To make T-HEAD aclint timer more closer to the aclint spec, use > >> regs-names to represent the mtimecmp register, which can avoid hack > >> for unsupport mtime register of T-HEAD aclint timer. > >> > > > >I don't understand this reasoning. You had one entry, you still have one > >entry. Adding reg-names (not regs-names) does not change it. > > > > If no "reg-names", all the register of ACLINT should be defined. However, > T-HEAD aclint timer of sg2042 only supports mtimecmp register. If no extra > prompt is provided for the SBI, it will fail to recognize aclint timer > registers when parsing the aclint node with one reg entry. > > There is another way to avoid this by using an empty entry to identify > unsupported mtime, but Conor have already rejected this. See [1]. > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231114-skedaddle-precinct-66c8897227bb@squawk/ [1] Perhaps you misunderstood my suggestion. I was looking for _both_ registers to be defined in the binding as well as adding reg-names as a required property. Doing what you have here might work for your use case, but does not make sense from a bindings point of view as there is no way to describe the mtime register, should it exist in another SoC. Cheers, Conor
> >On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 08:30:21PM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote: >>> >>> On 17/11/2023 06:07, Inochi Amaoto wrote: >>>> The timer registers of aclint don't follow the clint layout and can >>>> be mapped on any different offset. As sg2042 uses separated timer >>>> and mswi for its clint, it should follow the aclint spec and have >>>> separated registers. >>>> >>>> The previous patch introduced a new type of T-HEAD aclint timer which >>>> has clint timer layout. Although it has the clint timer layout, it >>>> should follow the aclint spec and uses the separated mtime and mtimecmp >>>> regs. So a ABI change is needed to make the timer fit the aclint spec. >>>> >>>> To make T-HEAD aclint timer more closer to the aclint spec, use >>>> regs-names to represent the mtimecmp register, which can avoid hack >>>> for unsupport mtime register of T-HEAD aclint timer. >>>> >>> >>> I don't understand this reasoning. You had one entry, you still have one >>> entry. Adding reg-names (not regs-names) does not change it. >>> >> >> If no "reg-names", all the register of ACLINT should be defined. However, >> T-HEAD aclint timer of sg2042 only supports mtimecmp register. If no extra >> prompt is provided for the SBI, it will fail to recognize aclint timer >> registers when parsing the aclint node with one reg entry. >> >> There is another way to avoid this by using an empty entry to identify >> unsupported mtime, but Conor have already rejected this. See [1]. >> >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231114-skedaddle-precinct-66c8897227bb@squawk/ [1] > >Perhaps you misunderstood my suggestion. I was looking for _both_ >registers to be defined in the binding as well as adding reg-names as a >required property. Doing what you have here might work for your use >case, but does not make sense from a bindings point of view as there is >no way to describe the mtime register, should it exist in another SoC. > Thanks for your clarification. If I understand you correctly, the binding should have all registers that ACLINT has. But for specific use case, it should only contain supported registers and omit unsupported. Please correct me if I misunderstood. Thanks. >Cheers, >Conor >
> Thanks for your clarification. If I understand you correctly, the binding > should have all registers that ACLINT has. But for specific use case, > it should only contain supported registers and omit unsupported. Please > correct me if I misunderstood. Thanks. Yes.
>> Thanks for your clarification. If I understand you correctly, the binding >> should have all registers that ACLINT has. But for specific use case, >> it should only contain supported registers and omit unsupported. Please >> correct me if I misunderstood. Thanks. > >Yes. > Thanks, I will prepare a new binding for this.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/thead,c900-aclint-mtimer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/thead,c900-aclint-mtimer.yaml index fbd235650e52..2e92bcdeb423 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/thead,c900-aclint-mtimer.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/thead,c900-aclint-mtimer.yaml @@ -17,7 +17,12 @@ properties: - const: thead,c900-aclint-mtimer reg: - maxItems: 1 + items: + - description: MTIMECMP Registers + + reg-names: + items: + - const: mtimecmp interrupts-extended: minItems: 1 @@ -28,6 +33,7 @@ additionalProperties: false required: - compatible - reg + - reg-names - interrupts-extended examples: @@ -39,5 +45,6 @@ examples: <&cpu3intc 7>, <&cpu4intc 7>; reg = <0xac000000 0x00010000>; + reg-names = "mtimecmp"; }; ...
The timer registers of aclint don't follow the clint layout and can be mapped on any different offset. As sg2042 uses separated timer and mswi for its clint, it should follow the aclint spec and have separated registers. The previous patch introduced a new type of T-HEAD aclint timer which has clint timer layout. Although it has the clint timer layout, it should follow the aclint spec and uses the separated mtime and mtimecmp regs. So a ABI change is needed to make the timer fit the aclint spec. To make T-HEAD aclint timer more closer to the aclint spec, use regs-names to represent the mtimecmp register, which can avoid hack for unsupport mtime register of T-HEAD aclint timer. Signed-off-by: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@outlook.com> Fixes: 4734449f7311 ("dt-bindings: timer: Add Sophgo sg2042 CLINT timer") Link: https://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/opensbi/2023-October/005693.html Link: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-aclint/blob/main/riscv-aclint.adoc --- .../bindings/timer/thead,c900-aclint-mtimer.yaml | 9 ++++++++- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.42.1