Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: add SMP enable-method for Broadcom NSP

Hi Rob,

On 12/6/2015 6:22 AM, Rob Herring wrote:

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kapil Hali [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hi Rob,

On 12/2/2015 8:56 PM, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:24:05AM -0500, Kapil Hali wrote:

quoted

Add a compatible string "brcm,bcm-nsp-smp" for Broadcom's
Northstar Plus CPU to the 32-bit ARM CPU device tree binding
documentation file and create a new binding documentation for
Northstar Plus CPU.

Signed-off-by: Kapil Hali <redacted>
---
 .../bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt       | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt     |  1 +
 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf08872
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+Broadcom Northstar Plus SoC CPU Enable Method
+---------------------------------------------
+This binding defines the enable method used for starting secondary
+CPUs in the following Broadcom SoCs:
+  BCM58522, BCM58525, BCM58535, BCM58622, BCM58623, BCM58625, BCM88312
+
+The enable method is specified by defining the following required
+properties in the "cpus" device tree node:
+  - enable-method = "brcm,bcm-nsp-smp";
+  - secondary-boot-reg = <...>;

Both of these are supposed to be per cpu core.

'enable-method' if not found in 'cpu' node is looked at in the 'cpus'
node. Except for two-three SoC families, 'enable-method' is within
'cpus' node. Is my interpretation incorrect? Did I miss anything here?

I'm not sure how you counted, but it is much more than 2-3 that are
correct (including all of PPC). It is quite mixed in dts files, but it
is documented to be per cpu node, so lets follow the documentation
please.

Rob

I looked at arch/arm/* and not other arch types. But, as you said, let
us keep it how it is in documentation and I have already updated latest
patch set reflecting this change.

Thanks,
Kapil