Re: [PATCH 2/3] dts: mpc512x: adjust clock specs for FEC nodes
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 11:52:09AM +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:48 +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:22:31AM +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:25 +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: a recent FEC binding document update that was motivated by i.MX development revealed that ARM and PowerPC implementations in Linux did not agree on the clock names to use for the FEC nodes change clock names from per to ipg in the FEC nodes of the mpc5121.dtsi include file such that the .dts specs comply with the common FEC binding this incompatible change does not break operation, because - COMMON_CLK support for MPC5121/23/25 and adjusted .dts files were only introduced in Linux v3.14-rc1, no mainline release provided these specs before - if this change won't make it for v3.14, the MPC512x CCF support provides full backwards compability, and keeps operating with device trees which lack clock specs or don't match in the names Signed-off-by: Gerhard Sittig g...@denx.de ping Are there opinions about making PowerPC users of FEC use the same clock names as ARM users do, to re-use (actually: keep sharing) the FEC binding? The alternative would be to fragment the FEC binding into several bindings for ARM and PowerPC, which I feel would be undesirable, and is not necessary. As I already said, Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-fec.txt was created specifically for i.MX FEC controller from day one. And even as of today, it doesn't serve PowerPC, because for example the property 'phy-mode' documented as required one is not required by PowerPC FEC. My opinion would be to patch fsl-fec.txt a little bit to make it clear that it's a binding doc for i.MX FEC, and create the other one for PowerPC FEC. This is the way less confusing to people and easier for binding maintenance. Should we still try to have a common behaviour where possible? Such that even if there are two bindings, they don't diverge in unnecessary ways? Maybe the long term goal should be to share the code. The MPC5200 FEC and the i.MX FEC are very similar. Only the DMA engine is quite different. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0| Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917- | ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 2/3] dts: mpc512x: adjust clock specs for FEC nodes
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:48 +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:22:31AM +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:25 +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: a recent FEC binding document update that was motivated by i.MX development revealed that ARM and PowerPC implementations in Linux did not agree on the clock names to use for the FEC nodes change clock names from per to ipg in the FEC nodes of the mpc5121.dtsi include file such that the .dts specs comply with the common FEC binding this incompatible change does not break operation, because - COMMON_CLK support for MPC5121/23/25 and adjusted .dts files were only introduced in Linux v3.14-rc1, no mainline release provided these specs before - if this change won't make it for v3.14, the MPC512x CCF support provides full backwards compability, and keeps operating with device trees which lack clock specs or don't match in the names Signed-off-by: Gerhard Sittig g...@denx.de ping Are there opinions about making PowerPC users of FEC use the same clock names as ARM users do, to re-use (actually: keep sharing) the FEC binding? The alternative would be to fragment the FEC binding into several bindings for ARM and PowerPC, which I feel would be undesirable, and is not necessary. As I already said, Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-fec.txt was created specifically for i.MX FEC controller from day one. And even as of today, it doesn't serve PowerPC, because for example the property 'phy-mode' documented as required one is not required by PowerPC FEC. My opinion would be to patch fsl-fec.txt a little bit to make it clear that it's a binding doc for i.MX FEC, and create the other one for PowerPC FEC. This is the way less confusing to people and easier for binding maintenance. Should we still try to have a common behaviour where possible? Such that even if there are two bindings, they don't diverge in unnecessary ways? But given that we already are past -rc5, I guess the suggested change is too late for v3.14 anyway. So we have to live with the fact of a mainline release of different behaviour. And the backwards compatibility support in the MPC512x CCF implementation allows to cope with a potential future ipg unification while still working with former per using device trees. There's no blocker. So nevermind. virtually yours Gerhard Sittig -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: off...@denx.de ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 2/3] dts: mpc512x: adjust clock specs for FEC nodes
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:22:31AM +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:25 +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: a recent FEC binding document update that was motivated by i.MX development revealed that ARM and PowerPC implementations in Linux did not agree on the clock names to use for the FEC nodes change clock names from per to ipg in the FEC nodes of the mpc5121.dtsi include file such that the .dts specs comply with the common FEC binding this incompatible change does not break operation, because - COMMON_CLK support for MPC5121/23/25 and adjusted .dts files were only introduced in Linux v3.14-rc1, no mainline release provided these specs before - if this change won't make it for v3.14, the MPC512x CCF support provides full backwards compability, and keeps operating with device trees which lack clock specs or don't match in the names Signed-off-by: Gerhard Sittig g...@denx.de ping Are there opinions about making PowerPC users of FEC use the same clock names as ARM users do, to re-use (actually: keep sharing) the FEC binding? The alternative would be to fragment the FEC binding into several bindings for ARM and PowerPC, which I feel would be undesirable, and is not necessary. As I already said, Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-fec.txt was created specifically for i.MX FEC controller from day one. And even as of today, it doesn't serve PowerPC, because for example the property 'phy-mode' documented as required one is not required by PowerPC FEC. My opinion would be to patch fsl-fec.txt a little bit to make it clear that it's a binding doc for i.MX FEC, and create the other one for PowerPC FEC. This is the way less confusing to people and easier for binding maintenance. Shawn ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 2/3] dts: mpc512x: adjust clock specs for FEC nodes
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:25 +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote:
a recent FEC binding document update that was motivated by i.MX
development revealed that ARM and PowerPC implementations in Linux
did not agree on the clock names to use for the FEC nodes
change clock names from per to ipg in the FEC nodes of the
mpc5121.dtsi include file such that the .dts specs comply with
the common FEC binding
this incompatible change does not break operation, because
- COMMON_CLK support for MPC5121/23/25 and adjusted .dts files
were only introduced in Linux v3.14-rc1, no mainline release
provided these specs before
- if this change won't make it for v3.14, the MPC512x CCF support
provides full backwards compability, and keeps operating with
device trees which lack clock specs or don't match in the names
Signed-off-by: Gerhard Sittig g...@denx.de
ping
Are there opinions about making PowerPC users of FEC use the same
clock names as ARM users do, to re-use (actually: keep sharing)
the FEC binding? The alternative would be to fragment the FEC
binding into several bindings for ARM and PowerPC, which I feel
would be undesirable, and is not necessary.
It would be nice to ship v3.14 (the first release with proper CCF
support for MPC512x) in a shape that is consistent with other FEC
users (ARM i.MX). We are lucky to have noticed the difference
before the release, and need not introduce the incompatibility,
and need not document and support obsolete conditions but can fix
them instead.
---
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc5121.dtsi |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc5121.dtsi
b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc5121.dtsi
index 2c0e1552d20b..a5a375598ed8 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc5121.dtsi
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc5121.dtsi
@@ -281,7 +281,7 @@
#address-cells = 1;
#size-cells = 0;
clocks = clks MPC512x_CLK_FEC;
- clock-names = per;
+ clock-names = ipg;
};
eth0: ethernet@2800 {
@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@
local-mac-address = [ 00 00 00 00 00 00 ];
interrupts = 4 0x8;
clocks = clks MPC512x_CLK_FEC;
- clock-names = per;
+ clock-names = ipg;
};
/* USB1 using external ULPI PHY */
--
1.7.10.4
virtually yours
Gerhard Sittig
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: off...@denx.de
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
