mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>,
	Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] firmware: of: populate /firmware/ node during init
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 17:54:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <af1836ea-d00b-fced-8665-27ba889e7a4e@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a3=8D5Mz54TYbfyrPC7yyKY-m7=H1OfS9JVKTdC0h-tHw@mail.gmail.com>

(sorry for replying on old thread)

On 11/08/17 16:54, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>>>> Since "/firmware" does not have its own "compatible" property as it's
>>>> just collection of nodes representing firmware interface, it's sub-nodes
>>>> are not populated during system initialization.
>>>>
>>>> Currently different firmware drivers search the /firmware/ node and
>>>> populate the sub-node devices selectively. Instead we can populate
>>>> the /firmware/ node during init to avoid more drivers continuing to
>>>> populate the devices selectively.
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds initcall to achieve the same.
>>>
>>> Hmm, I'm a bit skeptical whether representing anything under /firmware
>>> as a platform device is a good idea. Having a more structured way to
>>> probe those seems like a good idea, but maybe a different subsystem
>>> would be more appropriate.
>>>
>>> I do realize that a 'platform_device' has become a rather generic abstraction
>>> for almost anything, but at some point we might want to draw the line
>>> of what is a platform_device.
>>
>> I guess the question how are they different? Most of what's under
>> drivers/firmware/ are platform drivers. I think they are mostly either
>> smc calls or mailbox interfaces. Would there be any advantage to
>> creating an smc bus or mailbox bus?
> 
> I guess one difference I see is between things that are purely software
> based (smc, efi runtime, rtas,  ...) and those that talk to some
> hardware other than the CPU running some firmware.
> 
> The first category seems like a good fit for /firmware in DT and
> for /sys/firmware in sysfs, while the second category would be
> represented elsewhere in both DT and sysfs.
> 

After some thoughts and looking around I see examples of lots of drivers
using platform device for firmware interface including rtc-efi.

So IIUC, anything exposed to userspace about sch firmware interface must
be in "/sys/firmware", but I don't see any issue with kernel handling
them as platform device/driver internally.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-09-27 16:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-11 13:30 [PATCH 0/3] " Sudeep Holla
2017-08-11 13:30 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Sudeep Holla
2017-08-11 14:15   ` Rob Herring
2017-08-11 15:16     ` Sudeep Holla
2017-08-11 15:22       ` Sudeep Holla
2017-08-11 14:37   ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-08-11 15:05     ` Rob Herring
2017-08-11 15:54       ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-08-14 13:28         ` Sudeep Holla
2017-09-27 16:54         ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2017-08-11 15:37     ` Sudeep Holla
2017-08-11 13:30 ` [PATCH 2/3] firmware: qcom_scm: drop redandant of_platform_populate Sudeep Holla
2017-08-11 13:30 ` [PATCH 3/3] drivers: tee: rework optee_driver_{init,exit} to use platform device Sudeep Holla

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=af1836ea-d00b-fced-8665-27ba889e7a4e@arm.com \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=andy.gross@linaro.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jens.wiklander@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®