[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRE: [PATCH 0/2] arm: add a /proc/cpuinfo platform extension
    On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 4:01 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote:
    >> I did a grep of glibc's source (cvs-2.9, the only one currently on my
    >> system) to see what it tries to parse out of /proc/cpuinfo. These are
    >> the only ones I could find:
    > According to Google Codesearch there are a few utilities around which
    > read /proc/cpuinfo. I honestly don't know if any of them will break,
    > though I suspect not. I think that seemingly innocent userspace API
    > changes like this have broken things in the past though.

    Fair enough.

    >>>>> The other problem I see is that you have a single callback for registering
    >>>>> the arch specific information. In you ep93xx example, each of the ep93xx
    >>>>> boards must add:
    >>>>> .arch_cpuinfo = ep93xx_cpuinfo,
    >>>>> If one of the boards has some additional information to make available,
    >>>>> it would need to reimplement the entire callback, which gets messy.
    >>>> Not necessarily.
    >>>> If a board, such as the ts72xx, wanted to add additional information
    >>>> it just has to register it's private callback then call the ep93xx core
    >>>> supplied callback at the desired point in it's private one.
    >>>> The ts72xx currently does this exact thing with the .map_io callback.
    >>>> It supplies it's own private one to map the external FPGA. It first calls
    >>>> the ep93xx core to map the ahb/apb space then it does an iotable_init to
    >>>> map the FPGA.
    >>> Okay, fair point. I still don't like having the seq_file callback being
    >>> in machine_desc. It means that all of the board files have to be edited
    >>> to add the callback. It should be something which happens automagically
    >>> in the platform core. Perhaps using a weak function for the callback, or
    >>> a #define check.
    >> The callback is copied from the machine_desc in arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
    >> just like the other architecture-specific pointers. If an architecture
    >> does not have any additional data to dump they don't have to provide the
    >> callback. If it's not provided, the main seq_file callback (c_show in
    >> arch/arm/kernel/setup.c) will not call it. See Patch 1/3 of the series.
    > My point was that you end up adding to the machine_desc for _every_
    > board on the platform. In the ep93xx patch example the callback is the
    > same in every case. It doesn't belong in machine_desc, which is the
    > descriptor for a specific machine or board, it belongs to the platform
    > (ie ep93xx), so it should be hidden from the board specific files unless
    > they are providing extensions to the core arch info.

    The same argument could be made for the .map_io and .init_irq callbacks as
    well as the .timer pointer.

    The .map_io call back is the same for every ep93xx platform, except for ts72xx
    which needs to map it's external FPGA. The .init_irq callback and the .timer
    pointer are the same for all the existing ep93xx platforms.

    The point being, they might start out the same now but I can see at least the
    ts72xx one changing to dump the jumper settings provided by the external FPGA.

    My out-of-tree init file also uses a private .arch_cpuinfo to dump some
    information that is used by my user space applications to determine what
    features are available.

    Also, if a platform maintainer decides that the extra information is of no
    use on their platform, they don't need to provide the callback.


     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-24 00:33    [W:0.029 / U:19.876 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site