On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 03:09:30PM +0100, Emil Medve wrote:
> Portals are used by software running on processor cores, accelerators and
> network interfaces to communicate with the BMan
What exactly is a portal?
Is it a region of shared memory? A device?
I only received emails 2 and 3 of this series, so I'm lacking the
context necessary to understand the bindings.
>
> Signed-off-by: Emil Medve <emilian.me...@freescale.com>
> Change-Id: I6d245ffc14ba3d0e91d403ac7c3b91b75a9e6a95
> ---
> .../bindings/powerpc/fsl/bman-portals.txt | 50
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/bman-portals.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/bman-portals.txt
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/bman-portals.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..40e607e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/bman-portals.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
> +QorIQ DPAA Buffer Manager Portals Device Tree Binding
> +
> +Copyright (C) 2008 - 2014 Freescale Semiconductor Inc.
> +
> +CONTENTS
> +
> + - BMan Portal
> + - Example
> +
> +NOTE: The bindings described in this document are preliminary and
> subject to
> + change
While we've tried that elsewhere, unstable DT bindings have been shown
to be a major source of pain. I'd feel rather uncomfortable accepting a
binding that we already believe to be insufficient to describe the
hardware.
What do you expect to change?
> +
> +BMan Portal Node
> +
> +PROPERTIES
> +
> +- compatible
> + Usage: Required
> + Value type: <stringlist>
> + Definition: Must include "fsl,bman-portal-<hardware revision>"
> + May include "fsl,<SoC>-bman-portal" or "fsl,bman-portal"
> +
> +- reg
> + Usage: Required
> + Value type: <prop-encoded-array>
> + Definition: Two regions. The first is the cache-enabled region of
> + the portal. The second is the cache-inhibited region of
> + the portal
> +
> +EXAMPLE
> +
> +The example below shows a (P4080) BMan portals container/bus node with two
> portals
Is there any particular reason to place these under a simple-bus?
> +
> + bman-portals@ff4000000 {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> + compatible = "simple-bus";
> + ranges = <0 0xf 0xf4000000 0x200000>;
> +
> + bman-portal@0 {
> + compatible = "fsl,bman-portal-1.0.0", "fsl,bman-portal";
> + reg = <0x0 0x4000 0x100000 0x1000>;
It would be easier to read is each entry had its own set of brackets.
Initially this looked to me like a single 64-bit address/size pair.
> + interrupts = <105 2 0 0>;
> + };
Given the description above, surely you need to know what the portal is
used for? Or is that queried from the portal?
Thanks,
Mark.
> + bman-portal@4000 {
> + compatible = "fsl,bman-portal-1.0.0", "fsl,bman-portal";
> + reg = <0x4000 0x4000 0x101000 0x1000>;
> + interrupts = <107 2 0 0>;
> + };
> + };
> --
> 2.1.2
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
