On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 10:41, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 10:36, Damien Hedde <damien.he...@greensocs.com> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > Any comment about this ? > > Sorry we haven't got to this yet. This is on my to-review list, > but so are 23 other series, and I've been on holiday for the > past week or so. I will try to get to it this week.
I made a start on this, but it's going to take me some time to wrap my head around the design and the issues you raise in the cover letter. Given the bank holiday on Monday and some other commitments I have on Tuesday I think it's going to be the second half of next week at best before I can do a proper response. In general I like the code (though as you say we may not have got the interface quite right -- I had not appreciated some of the nested-reset cases when I proposed it I think). I think we could use a document (which would eventually live in docs/devel) that describes the reset system and provides some how-to style documentation for * what you need to do if you're writing a device * what you need to do if you are an external user of a device model and you want to reset it plus some notes on whatever we still have left over as remnants of the old reset scheme and any intended transitions to try to remove those remnants. I'll have a go at writing something because I think that will help me personally in trying to understand the problem domain and what the new design is doing. thanks -- PMM