Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] Enable L2 cache support on Exynos4210/4x12 SoCs
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:11:38PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: I'm fine with it either way. Russell, if you like you can merge http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung v3.19-next/pm-samsung-2 It'd be nicer to have a git URL for it. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] Enable L2 cache support on Exynos4210/4x12 SoCs
On Wednesday 03 December 2014 16:03:32 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:11:38PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: I'm fine with it either way. Russell, if you like you can merge http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung v3.19-next/pm-samsung-2 It'd be nicer to have a git URL for it. git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung v3.19-next/pm-samsung-2 I don't see much difference between the two, but I never cared to look into the protocol details. The one I listed first was the URL I got from Kukjin, and git could access that. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] Enable L2 cache support on Exynos4210/4x12 SoCs
Hello,
On 2014-11-27 23:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 12:48:22PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
This is an updated patchset, which intends to add support for L2 cache
on Exynos4 SoCs on boards running under secure firmware, which requires
certain initialization steps to be done with help of firmware, as
selected registers are writable only from secure mode.
First four patches extend existing support for secure write in L2C driver
to account for design of secure firmware running on Exynos. Namely:
1) direct read access to certain registers is needed on Exynos, because
secure firmware calls set several registers at once,
2) not all boards are running secure firmware, so .write_sec callback
needs to be installed in Exynos firmware ops initialization code,
3) write access to {DATA,TAG}_LATENCY_CTRL registers fron non-secure world
is not allowed and so must use l2c_write_sec as well,
4) on certain boards, default value of prefetch register is incorrect
and must be overridden at L2C initialization.
For boards running with firmware that provides access to individual
L2C registers this series should introduce no functional changes. However
since the driver is widely used on other platforms I'd like to kindly ask
any interested people for testing.
Further three patches add implementation of .write_sec and .configure
callbacks for Exynos secure firmware and necessary DT nodes to enable
L2 cache.
Changes in this version tested on Exynos4412-based TRATS2 and OdroidU3+
boards (both with secure firmware). There should be no functional change
for Exynos boards running without secure firmware. I do not have access
to affected non-Exynos boards, so I could not test on them.
So, I applied this series, and now I get a conflicts between my tree and
arm-soc for:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
arch/arm/mach-exynos/sleep.S
So, I'm going to un-stage the exynos bits, and we'll have to work out
some way to handle those.
I've already pointed that those patches depend on other previously merged to
exynos and arm-soc trees, but both Arnd and Kukjin said that those patch
series
should go via your kernel tree:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/15/158
That's why in v9 I rebased patches once again onto vanilla v3.18-rc4 and
uploaded
to your patch tracker. I see the following two possibilities to get them
merged:
1. Merge patches to rmk tree and resolve the merge conflict. The
conflict IS quite
easy to resolve - both trees, arm-soc and rmk only adds some code and
the goal is
simply to have both chunks added.
2. Merge the previous version (v8 from the above link) to arm-soc tree,
where it
applies cleanly on for-next, preferably with Russell's Acked-by.
Arnd, Russell: which approach do you prefer? How can I help to get it
merged?
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung RD Institute Poland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] Enable L2 cache support on Exynos4210/4x12 SoCs
On Friday 28 November 2014 09:55:53 Marek Szyprowski wrote: On 2014-11-27 23:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 12:48:22PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote: Changes in this version tested on Exynos4412-based TRATS2 and OdroidU3+ boards (both with secure firmware). There should be no functional change for Exynos boards running without secure firmware. I do not have access to affected non-Exynos boards, so I could not test on them. So, I applied this series, and now I get a conflicts between my tree and arm-soc for: arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c arch/arm/mach-exynos/sleep.S So, I'm going to un-stage the exynos bits, and we'll have to work out some way to handle those. Ok I've already pointed that those patches depend on other previously merged to exynos and arm-soc trees, but both Arnd and Kukjin said that those patch series should go via your kernel tree: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/15/158 That's why in v9 I rebased patches once again onto vanilla v3.18-rc4 and uploaded to your patch tracker. I see the following two possibilities to get them merged: 1. Merge patches to rmk tree and resolve the merge conflict. The conflict IS quite easy to resolve - both trees, arm-soc and rmk only adds some code and the goal is simply to have both chunks added. 2. Merge the previous version (v8 from the above link) to arm-soc tree, where it applies cleanly on for-next, preferably with Russell's Acked-by. Arnd, Russell: which approach do you prefer? How can I help to get it merged? I'm fine with it either way. Russell, if you like you can merge http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung v3.19-next/pm-samsung-2 into your tree and resolve the conflict on your end, we have a stable copy of that branch queued in next/soc. If you prefer v8 to go through arm-soc, that's fine with me too, or we could share a branch with v9 of Marek's series and have that merged into arm-soc/next/soc to resolve the conflict. arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] Enable L2 cache support on Exynos4210/4x12 SoCs
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 12:48:22PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
This is an updated patchset, which intends to add support for L2 cache
on Exynos4 SoCs on boards running under secure firmware, which requires
certain initialization steps to be done with help of firmware, as
selected registers are writable only from secure mode.
First four patches extend existing support for secure write in L2C driver
to account for design of secure firmware running on Exynos. Namely:
1) direct read access to certain registers is needed on Exynos, because
secure firmware calls set several registers at once,
2) not all boards are running secure firmware, so .write_sec callback
needs to be installed in Exynos firmware ops initialization code,
3) write access to {DATA,TAG}_LATENCY_CTRL registers fron non-secure world
is not allowed and so must use l2c_write_sec as well,
4) on certain boards, default value of prefetch register is incorrect
and must be overridden at L2C initialization.
For boards running with firmware that provides access to individual
L2C registers this series should introduce no functional changes. However
since the driver is widely used on other platforms I'd like to kindly ask
any interested people for testing.
Further three patches add implementation of .write_sec and .configure
callbacks for Exynos secure firmware and necessary DT nodes to enable
L2 cache.
Changes in this version tested on Exynos4412-based TRATS2 and OdroidU3+
boards (both with secure firmware). There should be no functional change
for Exynos boards running without secure firmware. I do not have access
to affected non-Exynos boards, so I could not test on them.
So, I applied this series, and now I get a conflicts between my tree and
arm-soc for:
arch/arm/mach-exynos/firmware.c
arch/arm/mach-exynos/sleep.S
So, I'm going to un-stage the exynos bits, and we'll have to work out
some way to handle those.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
