On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 05:38:37PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:

On 07/29/2020 06:20 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 06:20:40PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:

quoted

Document the bindings for ETMv4.4 and later with only system register
access.

Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: Mike Leach <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
---
  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt | 6 +++++-
  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt
index d711676b4a51..cfe47bdda728 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt

@@ -34,9 +34,13 @@ its hardware characteristcs.
  					Program Flow Trace Macrocell:
  			"arm,coresight-etm3x", "arm,primecell";
-		- Embedded Trace Macrocell (version 4.x):
+		- Embedded Trace Macrocell (version 4.x), with memory mapped access.
  			"arm,coresight-etm4x", "arm,primecell";
+		- Embedded Trace Macrocell (version 4.4 and later) with system
+		  register access only.
+			"arm,coresight-etm-v4.4";

I would rather call this "arm,coresight-etm-v4.4+" so that the binding's
semantic is still relevant when dealing with ETM v4.5 and onward.

AFAIUC, "compatible" stands for something that is compatible with v4.4.
All v4.4+ versions that are compatible with v4.4 are covered here.

Your position is valid - let's to with what you had.

Having said that I am fine with "arm,coresight-etm-v4.4+" , if it
is fine by the DT conventions.

Cheers
Suzuki

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel