Hi all,

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Bjorn Andersson
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri 20 Oct 07:43 PDT 2017, Georgi Djakov wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 09/08/2017 08:18 PM, Georgi Djakov wrote:

quoted

This patch introduce a new API to get requirements and configure the
interconnect buses across the entire chipset to fit with the current demand.

The API is using a consumer/provider-based model, where the providers are
the interconnect buses and the consumers could be various drivers.
The consumers request interconnect resources (path) between endpoints and
set the desired constraints on this data flow path. The providers receive
requests from consumers and aggregate these requests for all master-slave
pairs on that path. Then the providers configure each participating in the
topology node according to the requested data flow path, physical links and
constraints. The topology could be complicated and multi-tiered and is SoC
specific.

Signed-off-by: Georgi Djakov <redacted>
---
 Documentation/interconnect/interconnect.rst |  93 +++++++
 drivers/Kconfig                             |   2 +
 drivers/Makefile                            |   1 +
 drivers/interconnect/Kconfig                |  10 +
 drivers/interconnect/Makefile               |   1 +
 drivers/interconnect/interconnect.c         | 382 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/interconnect-consumer.h       |  73 ++++++
 include/linux/interconnect-provider.h       | 119 +++++++++
 8 files changed, 681 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/interconnect/interconnect.rst
 create mode 100644 drivers/interconnect/Kconfig
 create mode 100644 drivers/interconnect/Makefile
 create mode 100644 drivers/interconnect/interconnect.c
 create mode 100644 include/linux/interconnect-consumer.h
 create mode 100644 include/linux/interconnect-provider.h

Any comments on this patch?

Sorry, I still haven't found the time to do a proper review of this yet.

Same.

quoted

I am planning to change the prefix that is used for naming for example
the functions from "interconnect_" to something shorter like icbus_.

This isn't implementing a bus; if you feel that just ic_ is too short I
would suggest naming things inter_. (But keep the full name in the file
names)

Not trying to bikeshed too much, but how about icc_ for "interconnect
controller"? No idea if that is a hash collision with other in-kernel
apis.

Just "ic_" looks to me like "integrated circuit".

Regards,
Mike

Regards,
Bjorn