From: Mark Brown broonie@linaro.org
The ARMv8 code will reject topologies that omit some CPUs (and it's not clear that it's ever sensible to do so). Update the binding document to make this clear.
Since we're reformatting the text also fix incorrect grammar in the final "Any other configuration..." section by removing "consider".
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@linaro.org --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt index 4aa20e7..1061faf 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt @@ -75,9 +75,10 @@ The cpu-map node can only contain three types of child nodes:
whose bindings are described in paragraph 3.
-The nodes describing the CPU topology (cluster/core/thread) can only be -defined within the cpu-map node. -Any other configuration is consider invalid and therefore must be ignored. +The nodes describing the CPU topology (cluster/core/thread) can only +be defined within the cpu-map node and every core/thread in the system +must be defined within the topology. Any other configuration is +invalid and therefore must be ignored.
=========================================== 2.1 - cpu-map child nodes naming convention
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 02:21:07PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
From: Mark Brown broonie@linaro.org
The ARMv8 code will reject topologies that omit some CPUs (and it's not clear that it's ever sensible to do so). Update the binding document to make this clear.
Since we're reformatting the text also fix incorrect grammar in the final "Any other configuration..." section by removing "consider".
I think the commit log should be reworded, we update the bindings because they are incomplete, not because ARMv8 code decided to reject topologies that omit CPUs.
Patch is ok with me, thanks:
Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@linaro.org
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt index 4aa20e7..1061faf 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt @@ -75,9 +75,10 @@ The cpu-map node can only contain three types of child nodes: whose bindings are described in paragraph 3. -The nodes describing the CPU topology (cluster/core/thread) can only be -defined within the cpu-map node. -Any other configuration is consider invalid and therefore must be ignored. +The nodes describing the CPU topology (cluster/core/thread) can only +be defined within the cpu-map node and every core/thread in the system +must be defined within the topology. Any other configuration is +invalid and therefore must be ignored. =========================================== 2.1 - cpu-map child nodes naming convention -- 1.9.1
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 02:21:07PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
From: Mark Brown broonie@linaro.org
The ARMv8 code will reject topologies that omit some CPUs (and it's not clear that it's ever sensible to do so). Update the binding document to make this clear.
Since we're reformatting the text also fix incorrect grammar in the final "Any other configuration..." section by removing "consider".
I think the commit log should be reworded, we update the bindings because they are incomplete, not because ARMv8 code decided to reject topologies that omit CPUs.
Patch is ok with me, thanks:
Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com
Applied for 3.15.
Rob
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:01:31PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
Patch is ok with me, thanks:
Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com
Applied for 3.15.
Catalin already sent this to Linus I think unless I got my patches confused.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 06:01:31PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
Patch is ok with me, thanks:
Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com
Applied for 3.15.
Catalin already sent this to Linus I think unless I got my patches confused.
Yes, you're right.
Rob
linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org
-
Lorenzo Pieralisi -
Mark Brown -
Rob Herring