Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:08:32 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:37:02AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: [...] This isn't really a big deal to me, as I'm only interested in RISC-V systems, but there's been some pushback on the concept of an SBI so it seemed like a

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 12:08:32 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:37:02AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: [...] This isn't really a big deal to me, as I'm only interested in RISC-V systems, but there's been some pushback on the concept of an SBI so it seemed like a

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Jonathan Neuschäfer
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:37:02AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: [...] > This isn't really a big deal to me, as I'm only interested in RISC-V > systems, but there's been some pushback on the concept of an SBI so it > seemed like a simple way to allow people to build non-SBI (and there for not >

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Jonathan Neuschäfer
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:37:02AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: [...] > This isn't really a big deal to me, as I'm only interested in RISC-V > systems, but there's been some pushback on the concept of an SBI so it > seemed like a simple way to allow people to build non-SBI (and there for not >

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:08:44 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:28:01PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > > +RISC-V Supervisor Binary Interface (SBI) > > + > > +The RISC-V privileged ISA specification mandates the presence of a supervisor > >

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 17:08:44 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:28:01PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > > +RISC-V Supervisor Binary Interface (SBI) > > + > > +The RISC-V privileged ISA specification mandates the presence of a supervisor > >

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:45:20 PST (-0800), r...@kernel.org wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to possibly remove the SBI

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:45:20 PST (-0800), r...@kernel.org wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to possibly remove the SBI

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Mark Rutland
Hi Palmer, On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:28:01PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:28:56 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > +RISC-V Supervisor Binary Interface (SBI) > > > + > > > +The RISC-V

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-21 Thread Mark Rutland
Hi Palmer, On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:28:01PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:28:56 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > +RISC-V Supervisor Binary Interface (SBI) > > > + > > > +The RISC-V

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Jonathan Neuschäfer
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:28:01PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: [...] > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/riscv.sbi.txt > > > > Nit: Other bindings use either a comma (as in the compatible string, > > "riscv,sbi.txt") or a dash (vendor-product.txt, "riscv-sbi.txt") in the > >

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Jonathan Neuschäfer
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:28:01PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: [...] > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/riscv.sbi.txt > > > > Nit: Other bindings use either a comma (as in the compatible string, > > "riscv,sbi.txt") or a dash (vendor-product.txt, "riscv-sbi.txt") in the > >

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Rob Herring
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's > no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to > possibly remove the SBI later. If it is mandatory, then it should not be in DT. DT is

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Rob Herring
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's > no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to > possibly remove the SBI later. If it is mandatory, then it should not be in DT. DT is

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:28:56 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to possibly remove the

Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:28:56 PST (-0800), j.neuschae...@gmx.net wrote: On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to possibly remove the

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Jonathan Neuschäfer
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's > no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to > possibly remove the SBI later. Thanks! > > CC: Jonathan Neuschäfer

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Jonathan Neuschäfer
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:50:00AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's > no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to > possibly remove the SBI later. Thanks! > > CC: Jonathan Neuschäfer > Signed-off-by:

[PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to possibly remove the SBI later. CC: Jonathan Neuschäfer Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt ---

[PATCH] dt-bindings: Add a RISC-V SBI firmware node

2017-11-20 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
The RISC-V privileged ISA mandates the presence of an SBI, but there's no reason not to put it in the device tree. This would allow us to possibly remove the SBI later. CC: Jonathan Neuschäfer Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt --- .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/riscv.sbi.txt | 20