Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-29 Thread Lorenzo Pieralisi
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 08:46:38PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote: On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:59:30 +0100, Mark Rutland mark.rutl...@arm.com 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

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-28 Thread Grant Likely
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:59:30 +0100, Mark Rutland mark.rutl...@arm.com 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

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-22 Thread Mark Rutland
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 Herrenschmidt wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 12:50 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: I wonder

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-22 Thread Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
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 Herrenschmidt wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 12:50

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-19 Thread Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
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) +{ + const __be32 *cell;

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-19 Thread Mark Rutland
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 which the updated bindings[1] define #address-cells = 0 and so no reg property. [1] -

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-19 Thread Rob Herring
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 which the updated bindings[1] define #address-cells =

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-19 Thread Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
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 which the

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-17 Thread Tomasz Figa
Hi Sudeep, This looks good to me overall, but I have one more question inline. On Friday 16 of August 2013 18:39:50 Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanage...@arm.com Currently different drivers requiring to access cpu device node are parsing the device

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-17 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 12:50 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: I wonder how would this handle uniprocessor ARM (pre-v7) cores, for which the updated bindings[1] define #address-cells = 0 and so no reg property. [1] - http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/260795 Why did you do that

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-17 Thread Tomasz Figa
On Sunday 18 of August 2013 08:09:36 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 which the updated bindings[1] define #address-cells = 0 and so no reg property. [1] -

[RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-16 Thread Sudeep KarkadaNagesha
From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha sudeep.karkadanage...@arm.com 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

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc: refactor of_get_cpu_node to support other architectures

2013-08-16 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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) +{ + const __be32 *cell; + int ac, prop_len, tid; + u64 hwid;