Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: arm: qcom,coresight-static-replicator: Add property for source filtering

[Suzuki K Poulose]

On 22/08/2024 08:08, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 11:38:55AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 21/08/2024 04:13, Tao Zhang wrote:
> > > The is some "magic" hard coded filtering in the replicators,
> > > which only passes through trace from a particular "source". Add
> > > a new property "filter-src" to label a phandle to the coresight
> > > trace source device matching the hard coded filtering for the port.
> >
> > Minor nit: Please do not use abbreviate "source" in the bindings.
> > I am not an expert on other changes below and will leave it to
> > Rob/Krzysztof to comment.
> >
> > Rob, Krzysztof,
> >
> > We need someway to "link" (add a phandle) from a "port". The patch below
> > is extending "standard" port to add a phandle. Please let us know if
> > there is a better way.
> >
> > e.g.:
> >
> > filters = list of tuples of port, phandle. ?
> >
> > e.g.:
> >
> > filters = < 0, <&tpdm_video>,
> >              1, <&tpdm_mdss>
> > 	   >
>
> Current solution feels like band-aid - what if next time you need some
> second filter? Or "wall"? Or whatever? Next property?



> Isn't filter just one endpoint in the graph?
>
> A <--> filter <--> B

To be more precise, "Filter" is a "port (p0, p1, p2 below)" (among a
multi output ports).

For clearer example:

A0 <--> .. <--> ..\                  p0  / --> Filtered for (A1) <--> B1
A1 <--> .. <--> .. - < L(filters>    p1  - --> Filtered for (A2) <--> B2
A2 <--> .. <--> ../                  p2  \ --> Unfiltered        <--> B0



> Instead of
>
> A <----through-filter----> B?

The problem is we need to know the components in the path from A0 to X
through, (Not just A0 and L). And also we need to know "which port (p0 
vs p1 vs p2)" does the traffic take from a source (A0/A1/A2) out of the
link "L".

So ideally, we need a way to tie p0 -> A1, p1 -> A2.

would we need something else in the future ? I don't know for sure.
People could design their own things ;-). But this was the first time
ever in the last 12yrs since we supported coresight in the kernel.
(there is always a first time).

Fundamentally, the "ports" cannot have additional properties today.
Not sure if there are other usecases (I don't see why). So, we have
to manually extend like above, which I think is not nice.

Happy to proceed with anything that seems acceptable for you folks.

Suzuki



> Best regards,
> Krzysztof