lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v16 0/9] LPC: legacy ISA I/O support
    From
    Date
    On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 18:47 +0800, John Garry wrote:
    > This patchset supports the IPMI-bt device attached to the Low-Pin-
    > Count
    > interface implemented on Hisilicon Hip06/Hip07 SoC.
    > -----------
    > | LPC host|
    > | |
    > -----------
    > |
    > _____________V_______________LPC
    > | |
    > V V
    > ------------
    > | BT(ipmi)|
    > ------------
    >
    > When master accesses those peripherals beneath the Hip06/Hip07 LPC, a
    > specific
    > LPC driver is needed to make LPC host generate the standard LPC I/O
    > cycles with
    > the target peripherals'I/O port addresses. But on curent arm64 world,
    > there is
    > no real I/O accesses. All the I/O operations through in/out accessors
    > are based
    > on MMIO ranges; on Hip06/Hip07 LPC the I/O accesses are performed
    > through driver
    > specific accessors rather than MMIO.
    > To solve this issue and keep the relevant existing peripherals'
    > drivers untouched,
    > this patchset:
    > - introduces a generic I/O space management framework, logical PIO,
    > to support
    > I/O operations on host controllers operating either on MMIO
    > buses or on buses
    > requiring specific driver I/O accessors;
    > - redefines the in/out accessors to provide a unified interface for
    > both MMIO
    > and driver specific I/O operations. Using logical PIO, th call of
    > in/out() from
    > the host children drivers, such as ipmi-si, will be redirected to
    > the
    > corresponding device-specific I/O hooks to perform the I/O
    > accesses.
    >
    > Based on this patch-set, all the I/O accesses to Hip06/Hip07 LPC
    > peripherals can
    > be supported without any changes on the existing ipmi-si driver.
    >
    > The whole patchset has been tested on Hip07 D05 board both using DTB
    > and ACPI.
    >

    > V15 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/26/584

    Thanks for an update.
    Though I answered to previous thread.

    Summary: I'm fine with the series as long as maintainers are fine
    (Rafael et al.). On personal side I think that the handler approach is
    better. Details are in v15 thread.

    --
    Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
    Intel Finland Oy

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-03-06 12:22    [W:5.131 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site