Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Tue, 2016-02-16 at 07:19 +, Raghav Dogra wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: Scott Wood [mailto:o...@buserror.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:12 AM > > To: Raghav Dogra ; Brian Norris > > ; Li Yang > > Cc: Raghav Dogra ; linux-...@lists.infradead.org; > > linuxppc-dev ; Prabhakar Kushwaha > > ; Jaiprakash Singh > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0 > > > > On Mon, 2016-02-15 at 06:18 +, Raghav Dogra wrote: > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Brian Norris [mailto:computersforpe...@gmail.com] > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 1:14 AM > > > > To: Li Yang > > > > Cc: Raghav Dogra ; > > > > linux-...@lists.infradead.org; linuxppc-dev > > > > ; o...@buserror.net; Prabhakar > > > > Kushwaha ; Jaiprakash Singh > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version > > > > 2.0 > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:07:16PM -0600, Li Yang wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map > > > > > > page. > > > > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > > > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to > > > > > > appropriate PAGE sizes. > > > > > > > > > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so > > > > > independent that they have to be on different page boundaries, it > > > > > would make more sense for them to be defined as separate reg > > > > > regions in the device tree at the very beginning. Then we would > > > > > only need to change the device tree now and it would be future proof > > for any page size. > > > > > > > > To be clear: Scott, you were NACK'ing the DT binding change request, > > > > right? I though we had an Ack on the previous revision (that Raghav > > > > failed to carry). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra > > > > > > > > > > The patch cannot apply on latest 4.5-rc cleanly either. > > > > > Otherwise, > > > > > > > > Yeah... neither this patch nor its (allegedly) dependent patch [1] > > > > apply cleanly. > > > > > > > > If you expect me to take this patch via MTD, please rebase to > > > > l2-mtd.git as stated here: > > > > > > > > http://linux-mtd.infradead.org/source.html > > > > > > > I expect Scott to pick this patch, and apply via linuxppc-dev. I will > > > send the patch on based on > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > > Branch "master" > > > > Why are you expecting that, for a patch that touches an MTD driver and > > doesn't touch arch/powerpc, and for which I've already given an ack for it > > to > > go via the MTD tree? > > I was expecting that because this patch is dependent on the > "drivers/memory: Add deep sleep support for IFC" patch > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/582762/ for which an ACK is still > pending. > So, till you ACK that patch, Brian won't be able to pick that patch, I > guess. > So, I thought you can pick both the patches when an ACK is given to the deep > sleep patch. I recommend respinning this patch without that dependency, as this patch is ready now (except for the rebase) and that patch is not, and then base the deep sleep patch on top of this one. I also expect that the final version of that patch will touch the NAND driver as well (see my reply to it). -Scott ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
RE: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
> -Original Message- > From: Scott Wood [mailto:o...@buserror.net] > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:12 AM > To: Raghav Dogra ; Brian Norris > ; Li Yang > Cc: Raghav Dogra ; linux-...@lists.infradead.org; > linuxppc-dev ; Prabhakar Kushwaha > ; Jaiprakash Singh > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0 > > On Mon, 2016-02-15 at 06:18 +, Raghav Dogra wrote: > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Brian Norris [mailto:computersforpe...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 1:14 AM > > > To: Li Yang > > > Cc: Raghav Dogra ; > > > linux-...@lists.infradead.org; linuxppc-dev > > > ; o...@buserror.net; Prabhakar > > > Kushwaha ; Jaiprakash Singh > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version > > > 2.0 > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:07:16PM -0600, Li Yang wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to > > > > > appropriate PAGE sizes. > > > > > > > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so > > > > independent that they have to be on different page boundaries, it > > > > would make more sense for them to be defined as separate reg > > > > regions in the device tree at the very beginning. Then we would > > > > only need to change the device tree now and it would be future proof > for any page size. > > > > > > To be clear: Scott, you were NACK'ing the DT binding change request, > > > right? I though we had an Ack on the previous revision (that Raghav > > > failed to carry). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra > > > > > > > > The patch cannot apply on latest 4.5-rc cleanly either. > > > > Otherwise, > > > > > > Yeah... neither this patch nor its (allegedly) dependent patch [1] > > > apply cleanly. > > > > > > If you expect me to take this patch via MTD, please rebase to > > > l2-mtd.git as stated here: > > > > > > http://linux-mtd.infradead.org/source.html > > > > > I expect Scott to pick this patch, and apply via linuxppc-dev. I will > > send the patch on based on > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > > Branch "master" > > Why are you expecting that, for a patch that touches an MTD driver and > doesn't touch arch/powerpc, and for which I've already given an ack for it to > go via the MTD tree? I was expecting that because this patch is dependent on the "drivers/memory: Add deep sleep support for IFC" patch https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/582762/ for which an ACK is still pending. So, till you ACK that patch, Brian won't be able to pick that patch, I guess. So, I thought you can pick both the patches when an ACK is given to the deep sleep patch. Anyhow, I have sent the newer version of this patch which is applicable on l2-mtd.git But it is still dependent on the deep sleep patch (which is applicable now on l2-mtd.git as well) -Raghav > > What tree did you use to generate this patch? If there's stuff in the MTD > tree that conflicts, that's all the more reason to send it via the MTD tree > (after rebasing onto it). > > -Scott ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Mon, 2016-02-15 at 06:18 +, Raghav Dogra wrote: > > > -Original Message- > > From: Brian Norris [mailto:computersforpe...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 1:14 AM > > To: Li Yang > > Cc: Raghav Dogra ; linux-...@lists.infradead.org; > > linuxppc-dev ; o...@buserror.net; Prabhakar > > Kushwaha ; Jaiprakash Singh > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0 > > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:07:16PM -0600, Li Yang wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra > > wrote: > > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to > > > > appropriate PAGE sizes. > > > > > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent > > > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more > > > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device > > > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the > > > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. > > > > To be clear: Scott, you were NACK'ing the DT binding change request, > > right? I > > though we had an Ack on the previous revision (that Raghav failed to > > carry). > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > > > > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra > > > > > > The patch cannot apply on latest 4.5-rc cleanly either. Otherwise, > > > > Yeah... neither this patch nor its (allegedly) dependent patch [1] apply > > cleanly. > > > > If you expect me to take this patch via MTD, please rebase to l2-mtd.git > > as > > stated here: > > > > http://linux-mtd.infradead.org/source.html > > > I expect Scott to pick this patch, and apply via linuxppc-dev. I will send > the patch on based on > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git > Branch "master" Why are you expecting that, for a patch that touches an MTD driver and doesn't touch arch/powerpc, and for which I've already given an ack for it to go via the MTD tree? What tree did you use to generate this patch? If there's stuff in the MTD tree that conflicts, that's all the more reason to send it via the MTD tree (after rebasing onto it). -Scott ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
RE: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
> -Original Message- > From: Brian Norris [mailto:computersforpe...@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 1:14 AM > To: Li Yang > Cc: Raghav Dogra ; linux-...@lists.infradead.org; > linuxppc-dev ; o...@buserror.net; Prabhakar > Kushwaha ; Jaiprakash Singh > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0 > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:07:16PM -0600, Li Yang wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra > wrote: > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to > > > appropriate PAGE sizes. > > > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent > > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more > > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device > > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the > > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. > > To be clear: Scott, you were NACK'ing the DT binding change request, right? I > though we had an Ack on the previous revision (that Raghav failed to carry). > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > > > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra > > > > The patch cannot apply on latest 4.5-rc cleanly either. Otherwise, > > Yeah... neither this patch nor its (allegedly) dependent patch [1] apply > cleanly. > > If you expect me to take this patch via MTD, please rebase to l2-mtd.git as > stated here: > > http://linux-mtd.infradead.org/source.html > I expect Scott to pick this patch, and apply via linuxppc-dev. I will send the patch on based on git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git Branch "master" -Raghav > > Acked-by: Li Yang > > Brian > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/564785/ ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 11:44 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:07:16PM -0600, Li Yang wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra > > wrote: > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to > > > appropriate > > > PAGE sizes. > > > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent > > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more > > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device > > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the > > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. > > To be clear: Scott, you were NACK'ing the DT binding change request, > right? I though we had an Ack on the previous revision (that Raghav > failed to carry). Yes. The patch is OK, the DT binding change (which is not in the patch) is not. -Scott ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 05:07:16PM -0600, Li Yang wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra wrote: > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to appropriate > > PAGE sizes. > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. To be clear: Scott, you were NACK'ing the DT binding change request, right? I though we had an Ack on the previous revision (that Raghav failed to carry). > > > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra > > The patch cannot apply on latest 4.5-rc cleanly either. Otherwise, Yeah... neither this patch nor its (allegedly) dependent patch [1] apply cleanly. If you expect me to take this patch via MTD, please rebase to l2-mtd.git as stated here: http://linux-mtd.infradead.org/source.html > Acked-by: Li Yang Brian [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/564785/ ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Fri, 2016-02-05 at 12:05 -0600, Li Yang wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >> > On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 17:07 -0600, Li Yang wrote: >> > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra >> > > wrote: >> > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. >> > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. >> > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to >> > > > appropriate >> > > > PAGE sizes. >> > > >> > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent >> > > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more >> > > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device >> > > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the >> > > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. >> > >> > That's great if you have a time machine. Otherwise, NACK. >> >> I didn't suggest that we need to change it now. But we might need to >> be more careful in the future when creating bindings for new hardware. > > At the time the binding was created there was no reason to believe that the > layout would change. Probably separate blocks that intentionally start from a page boundary(with big gaps before it) would be a good idea? Regards, Leo ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Fri, 2016-02-05 at 12:05 -0600, Li Yang wrote: > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 17:07 -0600, Li Yang wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra > > > wrote: > > > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to > > > > appropriate > > > > PAGE sizes. > > > > > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent > > > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more > > > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device > > > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the > > > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. > > > > That's great if you have a time machine. Otherwise, NACK. > > I didn't suggest that we need to change it now. But we might need to > be more careful in the future when creating bindings for new hardware. At the time the binding was created there was no reason to believe that the layout would change. -Scott ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 17:07 -0600, Li Yang wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra wrote: >> > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. >> > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. >> > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to appropriate >> > PAGE sizes. >> >> If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent >> that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more >> sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device >> tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the >> device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. > > That's great if you have a time machine. Otherwise, NACK. I didn't suggest that we need to change it now. But we might need to be more careful in the future when creating bindings for new hardware. Regards, Leo ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 17:07 -0600, Li Yang wrote: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra wrote: > > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to appropriate > > PAGE sizes. > > If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent > that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more > sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device > tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the > device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. That's great if you have a time machine. Otherwise, NACK. -Scott ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] mtd/ifc: Add support for IFC controller version 2.0
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Raghav Dogra wrote: > The new IFC controller version 2.0 has a different memory map page. > Upto IFC 1.4 PAGE size is 4 KB and from IFC2.0 PAGE size is 64KB. > This patch segregates the IFC global and runtime registers to appropriate > PAGE sizes. If the global registers and the runtime registers are so independent that they have to be on different page boundaries, it would make more sense for them to be defined as separate reg regions in the device tree at the very beginning. Then we would only need to change the device tree now and it would be future proof for any page size. > > Signed-off-by: Jaiprakash Singh > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra The patch cannot apply on latest 4.5-rc cleanly either. Otherwise, Acked-by: Li Yang > --- > This patch is the new version of following patch with changed title: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/557391/ > > This patch is dependent on the > "drivers/memory: Add deep sleep support for IFC" patch: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/564785/ > > drivers/memory/fsl_ifc.c| 250 > +--- > drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_nand.c | 72 ++-- > include/linux/fsl_ifc.h | 48 +--- > 3 files changed, 202 insertions(+), 168 deletions(-) Regards, Leo ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
