Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 08 Jan 2020 01:01:39 +0530 | From | Sibi Sankar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] interconnect: qcom: Add OSM L3 interconnect provider support |
| |
On 2020-01-08 00:44, Evan Green wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 10:30 AM Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org> > wrote: >> >> Hey Evan, >> >> On 12/7/19 12:46 AM, Evan Green wrote: >> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:42 AM Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hey Evan/Georgi, >> >> >> >> https://git.linaro.org/people/georgi.djakov/linux.git/commit/?h=icc-dev&id=9197da7d06e88666d1588e3c21a743e60381264d >> >> >> >> With the "Redefine interconnect provider >> >> DT nodes for SDM845" series, wouldn't it >> >> make more sense to define the OSM_L3 icc >> >> nodes in the sdm845.c icc driver and have >> >> the common helpers in osm_l3 driver? Though >> >> we don't plan on linking the OSM L3 nodes >> >> to the other nodes on SDM845/SC7180, we >> >> might have GPU needing to be linked to the >> >> OSM L3 nodes on future SoCs. Let me know >> >> how you want this done. >> >> >> >> Anyway I'll re-spin the series once the >> >> SDM845 icc re-work gets re-posted. >> > >> > I don't have a clear picture of the proposal. You'd put the couple of >> > extra defines in sdm845.c for the new nodes. But then you'd need to do >> > something in icc_set() of sdm845. Is that when you'd call out to the >> > osm_l3 driver? >> >> with sdm845 icc rework "https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11293399/" >> osm l3 icc provider needs to know the total number of rsc icc nodes, >> i.e I can define the total number of rsc nodes and continue using the >> same design as v3 since on sdm845/sc7180 gpu is not cache coherent. >> >> or have the osm l3 table population logic and osm icc_set as helpers >> and have it called from the sdm845/sc7180 icc driver so that we would >> be able to link osm_l3 with rsc nodes on future qcom SoCs. > > I see, so if we use the same design as v3, then the number of nodes is > established at compile-time, and ends up being specific to sdm845. I'm > fine with either approach, maybe leaning towards the hardcoded > #defines you have now, and waiting to do the refactoring until you > actually have two SoCs that can use this. > -Evan
Thanks will stick to the #defines for now.
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
|  |