Re: [PATCH v5 5/8] dt-bindings: fsi: Add OCC documentation

[Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Eddie James <eajames@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/20/2017 03:39 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:46:54PM -0600, Eddie James wrote:
>>>
>>> From: "Edward A. James" <eajames@us.ibm.com>
>>>
>>> Document the bindings for the P9 OCC device. OCC devices are accessed
>>> through the SBEFIFO.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Edward A. James <eajames@us.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,p9-occ.txt | 18
>>> ++++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,p9-occ.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,p9-occ.txt
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,p9-occ.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..79094f5
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,p9-occ.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
>>> +Device-tree bindings for P9 On-Chip Controller
>>> +----------------------------------------------
>>> +
>>> +The POWER9 On-Chip Controller is accessed through the SBEFIFO. All OCC
>>> nodes
>>> +must be child nodes of SBEFIFO devices (see ibm,p9-sbefifo.txt).
>>> +
>>> +Required properties:
>>> + - compatible = "ibm,p9-occ";
>>> +
>>> +Optional properties:
>>> + - reg = <processor index>;    : Index for the processor this OCC is on.
>>
>> reg should be how the parent (SBEFIFO) addresses this device. Would all
>> of these child devices be a unique processor?
>
>
> Yes. The "processor" here is indicating which P9 processor in the system,
> not whatever processor(s) this kernel is running on. We use this device tree
> on the service processor, which can be talking to multiple P9 chips (over
> SBEFIFO). This could probably be clarified by saying "P9 chip" or something.

Ah, okay.

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>