Adding PowerPC list
On 13/08/13 14:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, August 12, 2013 02:27:47 PM Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> The following changes since commit
>> d4e4ab86bcba5a72779c43dc1459f71fea3d89c8:
>>
>> Linux 3.11-rc5 (2013-08-11 18:04:20 -0700)
On 13/08/13 16:40, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> Adding PowerPC list
>
> On 13/08/13 14:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Monday, August 12, 2013 02:27:47 PM Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>>> The following changes since commit
>>> d4e4ab86bcba5a72779c43dc1459f71
On 13/08/13 19:37, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 08/13/2013 05:40 PM, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> Adding PowerPC list
>>
>> On 13/08/13 14:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 12, 2013 02:27:47 PM Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>>&
On 13/08/13 20:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 01:44:23 PM Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>> wrote:
>>> Adding PowerPC list
>>>
>>> On 13/08/13 14:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
&
On 13/08/13 22:07, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 19:29 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> I don't understand completely the use of ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s and
>> its implications on generic of_get_cpu_node implementation.
>> I see the
On 14/08/13 12:37, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 11:01 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> Yes this doesn't cover the historical "ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s",
>> for
>> which we can have PPC specific wrapper above the generic one i.e
On 14/08/13 13:53, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 08/14/2013 05:01 AM, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> On 13/08/13 22:07, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 19:29 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>>>> I don't understand completely the use of ibm,
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Hi,
This series needs to be prepended with the original series[1][2][3]
Except the first patch in the original series(which is merged into this
as last patch), there is no other change(apart from function signature)
I am posting only this part for feedback separately
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch removes the declaration of the function 'of_get_cpu_node'
which is not defined for openrisc. This is in preparation to move
it's definition from PPC to DT common code.
Again it could be there as it was originally copied from powerpc.
Signed
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch removes the declaration of the function 'of_get_cpu_node'
which is not defined for microblaze. This is in preparation to move
it's definition from PPC to DT common code.
Michal Simek says: "it was just there because Microblaze
was b
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch moves the generalized implementation of of_get_cpu_node from
PowerPC to DT core library, thereby adding support for retrieving cpu
node for a given logical cpu index on any architecture.
The CPU subsystem can now use this function to assign of_node in the
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are
parsing the device tree themselves. Since the ordering in the DT need
not match the logical cpu ordering, the parsing logic needs to consider
that. However, this has resulted in lots of code
On 16/08/13 05:50, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 18:09 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>>/* Check for ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s. If it doesn't exist
>> * fallback to "reg"
On 16/08/13 05:49, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 18:09 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are
>> parsing the device tree themselves. Since
On 15/08/13 18:09, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>
> This patch removes the declaration of the function 'of_get_cpu_node'
> which is not defined for openrisc. This is in preparation to move
> it's definition from PPC to DT common code.
&
On 16/08/13 13:32, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-16 at 09:48 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>
>>> Naming is a bit gross. You might want to make it clearer that
>>> we are talking about CPU IDs in the device-tree here.
>>>
>> Any part
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Hi,
This series needs to be prepended with the original series[1][2][3]
Except the first patch in the original series(which is merged into this
as last patch), there is no other change(apart from function signature)
I am posting only this part for feedback separately
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are
parsing the device tree themselves. Since the ordering in the DT need
not match the logical cpu ordering, the parsing logic needs to consider
that. However, this has resulted in lots of code
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch moves the generalized implementation of of_get_cpu_node from
PowerPC to DT core library, thereby adding support for retrieving cpu
node for a given logical cpu index on any architecture.
The CPU subsystem can now use this function to assign of_node in the
On 16/08/13 23:13, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-16 at 18:39 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> +static bool __of_find_n_match_cpu_property(struct device_node *cpun,
>> + const char *prop_name, int cpu, unsigned int
>> *thread)
&
On 16/08/13 23:14, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-16 at 18:39 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC
>> + /* Check for historical "ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s" property
>> +* for thread ids on PowerPC.
On 19/08/13 14:11, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 08/16/2013 12:39 PM, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> This patch moves the generalized implementation of of_get_cpu_node from
>> PowerPC to DT core library, thereby adding support for retriev
On 19/08/13 14:02, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 08/19/2013 05:19 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 11:09:36PM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 12:50 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:
I wonder how would this handle uniprocessor ARM (pre-v7) cores, for
whic
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch removes the declaration of the function 'of_get_cpu_node'
which is not defined for openrisc. This is in preparation to move
it's definition from PPC to DT common code.
Again it could be there as it was originally copied from powerpc.
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
As more and more information is getting added into the cpu node, the number
of drivers needing to parse the device tree for CPU nodes are increasing.
Most of the time, the information needed from the cpu node is preferred
in the logical CPU order. Hence many drivers
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch removes the declaration of the function 'of_get_cpu_node'
which is not defined for microblaze. This is in preparation to move
it's definition from PPC to DT common code.
Michal Simek says: "it was just there because Microblaze
was b
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
This patch moves the generalized implementation of of_get_cpu_node from
PowerPC to DT core library, thereby adding support for retrieving cpu
node for a given logical cpu index on any architecture.
The CPU subsystem can now use this function to assign of_node in the
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are
parsing the device tree themselves. Since the ordering in the DT need
not match the logical cpu ordering, the parsing logic needs to consider
that. However, this has resulted in lots of code
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
OF/DT core library now provides architecture specific hook to match the
logical cpu index with the corresponding physical identifier. Most of the
cpu DT node parsing and initialisation is contained in devtree.c. So it's
better to define ARM spe
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
CPUs are also registered as devices but the of_node in these cpu
devices are not initialized. Currently different drivers requiring
to access cpu device node are parsing the nodes themselves and
initialising the of_node in cpu device.
The of_node in all the cpu
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Multiple drivers need to get the cpu device node from the cpu logical
index and then access the of_node.
This patch adds helper function to fetch the device node directly.
Acked-by: Rob Herring
Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
---
include/linux/of_device.h
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Currently the topology code computes cpu capacity and stores it in
the list along with hwid(which is MPIDR) as it parses the CPU nodes
in the device tree. This is required as it needs to be mapped to the
logical CPU later.
Since the CPU device nodes can be retrieved
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Currently set_secondary_cpus_clock assume the CPU logical ordering
and the MPDIR in DT are same, which is incorrect.
Since the CPU device nodes can be retrieved in the logical ordering
using the DT helper, we can remove the devices tree parsing.
This patch removes
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Since the CPU device nodes can be retrieved using arch_of_get_cpu_node,
we can use it to avoid parsing the cpus node searching the cpu nodes and
mapping to logical index.
This patch removes parsing DT for cpu nodes by using of_get_cpu_node.
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Acked-by: Shawn Guo
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar
Signed-off-by: Sud
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Acked-by: Shawn Guo
Acked-by: Rob Herring
Acked-by: Viresh Ku
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Cc: Jason Cooper
Acked-by: Andrew Lunn
Acked-by: Viresh Ku
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Cc: Mark Langsdorf
Acked-by: Rob Herring
Acked-by: Viresh Ku
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Cc: Deepak Sikri
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar
Signed-off-by: Sud
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Cc: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar
Signed-off
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar
Signed-off
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar
Signed-off
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
appropriately for all the cpus, parsing here is redundant.
This patch removes all DT parsing and uses cpu->of_node instead.
Acked-by: Viresh Kumar
Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNage
On 20/08/13 13:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 10:30:05 AM Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are
>> parsing the device tree themselves. Since
On 22/08/13 07:15, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 10:30 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are
>> parsing the device tree themselves. Since
nges up to 1037b2752345cc5666e90b711a913ab2ae6c5920:
cpufreq: pmac32-cpufreq: remove device tree parsing for cpu nodes
(2013-08-21 10:29:56 +0100)
--------
Sudeep KarkadaNagesha (19):
microblaze: remove undefined of_get_cpu_node declaration
openrisc: remove
On 22/08/13 14:59, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> On 19/08/13 14:02, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On 08/19/2013 05:19 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 11:09:36PM +0100, Benjamin Herrensch
On 06/09/13 14:44, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> Now that the cpu device registration initialises the of_node(if available)
>> appropriately for all the cpus, p
On 09/09/13 15:32, Shawn Guo wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:24:39AM +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> Hi Shawn,
>>
>> Can you please clarify ? The fix would be as below but I would like to
>> know if setting cpu_dev to get_cpu_device(0)
On 10/09/13 03:44, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 04:24:18PM +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> Hi Shawn,
>>
>> Ok. But I am bit suspicious about devm_clk_get(cpu_dev, NULL).
>> I don't understand completely as how the clock are registere
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Hi,
The cache bindings are generic and used by many other architectures
apart from PPC. These patches fixes and move the existing definition
of of_find_next_cache_node to DT common code.
Regards,
Sudeep
Sudeep KarkadaNagesha (2):
powerpc: remove big endianness
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Currently big endianness of the device tree data is assumed in
of_find_next_cache_node for 'handle' when calling of_find_node_by_phandle.
In preparation to move this function to common code, this patch fixes
the endianness using 'be32_to_cpup
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
Since the definition of_find_next_cache_node is architecture independent,
the existing definition in powerpc can be moved to driver/of/base.c
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Cc: Grant Likely
Cc: Rob Herring
Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
---
arch/powerpc
On 18/09/13 15:51, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
> wrote:
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The cache bindings are generic and used by many other architectures
>> apart from PPC. These patc
Hi Grant,
On 18/09/13 17:18, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> On 18/09/13 15:51, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:53:03 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>> wrote:
>>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The cac
Hi Ben,
On 31/10/13 05:20, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 11:53 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
>> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
>>
>> Since the definition of_find_next_cache_node is architecture independent,
>> the existing definition in pow
56 matches
Mail list logo
