From: Amrit Anand <quic_amrianan@quicinc.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
<agross@kernel.org>, <andersson@kernel.org>,
<konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
<kernel@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add board-id support for multiple DT selection
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 18:26:06 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a930a3d6-0846-a709-8fe9-44335fec92ca@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b929f0cd-89b6-c48d-d466-db6bbed621b5@quicinc.com>
On 2/2/2024 10:30 AM, Amrit Anand wrote:
<snip>
>> There's a similar issue for EFI boot with how to select an OS installed
>> DTB[1]. You might not care now, but users may later on (like we have
>> already with QCom devices with fixed bootloaders). If you do this
>> board-id route, then no doubt that compatible values won't be specific
>> enough or have suitable fallbacks to be used. Then EFI boot can't use
>> compatible either and needs to use this QCom specific logic. It may be a
>> common property name, but all the types you defined are QCom specific
>> and the matching logic is pretty much undocumented. I'm not saying we
>> have to use compatible. There wasn't even agreement to use it for EFI
>> boot case. This does need to work for multiple vendors and multiple boot
>> scenarios.
>>
> Agree, given so many hardware identifiers Qcom uses to find the DT
> based on a best and exact match algorithm, it may not work as is for
> other vendors/users outside the scope of Qcom.
> Since we have none to very limited visibility into complete set of DT
> selection identifiers being used by other users or into their
> selection algorithms since it is mostly undocumented,
> designing a perfectly generic solution (one-size-fits-all) could be
> far-fetched. The number of board files in Qcom DT selection software
> package often reaches over 100 DT files due to multiple SoCs and
> board types being supported out of a single software package and these
> multiple hardware identifiers helps to pick the closest best match DT
> within a very large pool of DTs.
> Not to affect other users/vendors who would be using their own set of
> identifiers and an entirely different algorithm for DT selection,
> would it make more sense to define these Qcom specific
> identifiers within Qcom specific bindings (qcom.yaml), along with
> detailed documentation on our DT selection algorithm?
I have written a patch for defining Qcom specific identifiers within
Qcom specific bindings (qcom.yaml) along with documentation on DT
selection algorithm, would it be okay to send for review?
>
> Thanks,
> Amrit
>
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20231114232012.GD6601@bill-the-cat/#r
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-14 12:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-20 11:20 Amrit Anand
2024-01-20 11:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: hwinfo: Introduce board-id Amrit Anand
2024-01-20 12:36 ` Rob Herring
2024-01-20 19:10 ` Trilok Soni
2024-01-22 10:10 ` Amrit Anand
2024-01-23 11:50 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-01-23 17:18 ` Conor Dooley
2024-01-23 18:51 ` Elliot Berman
2024-01-23 20:05 ` Trilok Soni
2024-01-24 12:44 ` Amrit Anand
2024-01-23 12:09 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-01-24 12:42 ` Amrit Anand
2024-01-25 10:40 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-01-24 15:00 ` Rob Herring
2024-01-20 11:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: hwinfo: Add Qualcomm's board-id types Amrit Anand
2024-01-20 12:36 ` Rob Herring
2024-01-20 13:32 ` Konrad Dybcio
2024-01-22 10:07 ` Amrit Anand
2024-01-22 18:10 ` Elliot Berman
2024-01-22 19:27 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2024-01-24 12:47 ` Amrit Anand
2024-01-21 2:05 ` kernel test robot
2024-01-22 18:12 ` Elliot Berman
2024-01-20 13:04 ` [PATCH 0/2] Add board-id support for multiple DT selection Konrad Dybcio
2024-01-22 17:50 ` Elliot Berman
2024-01-24 14:56 ` Rob Herring
2024-02-02 5:00 ` Amrit Anand
2024-02-14 12:56 ` Amrit Anand [this message]
2024-02-14 13:12 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a930a3d6-0846-a709-8fe9-44335fec92ca@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_amrianan@quicinc.com \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@quicinc.com \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@linaro.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®