Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V3] config/arm: add Qualcomm Centriq 2400 part number

[Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thierry Herbelot <thierry.herbelot@6wind.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2021 4:16 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Thierry Herbelot <thierry.herbelot@6wind.com>; thomas@monjalon.net;
> jerinj@marvell.com; Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>; Honnappa
> Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; Juraj Linkeš
> <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> Subject: [PATCH V3] config/arm: add Qualcomm Centriq 2400 part number
> 
> 0xc00 is for "SoC 2.0" Qualcomm Centriq servers.
> 0x800 is for "SoC 1.1".
> 
> Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>
> Cc: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
> Cc: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> Cc: Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Herbelot <thierry.herbelot@6wind.com>
> --
> V2: add maintainers as Cc
> V3: fix meson syntax for the SoC v1.1 machine description
> ---
>  config/arm/meson.build | 12 ++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/config/arm/meson.build b/config/arm/meson.build index
> e83a56e0d589..b33303d09023 100644
> --- a/config/arm/meson.build
> +++ b/config/arm/meson.build
> @@ -179,7 +179,8 @@ implementer_qualcomm = {
>          ['RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES', 1]
>      ],
>      'part_number_config': {
> -        '0xc00': {'machine_args':  ['-march=armv8-a+crc']}
> +        '0x800': {'machine_args':  ['-march=armv8-a+crc']},
> +        '0xc00': {'machine_args':  ['-march=armv8-a+crc']},
>      }
>  }
> 
> @@ -223,8 +224,15 @@ soc_bluefield = {
>      'numa': false
>  }
> 
> +soc_centriq2400_v1_1 = {
> +    'description': 'Qualcomm Centriq 2400 (SoC v1.1)',
> +    'implementer': '0x51',
> +    'part_number': '0x800',
> +    'numa': false
> +}
> +
What is the difference between SoC v1.1 and SoC v2.0. Do they have different instruction levels or extensions?
They have the same machine_args. I think the two part numbers can share the same soc_xx. Because cross built binary can run on both SoCs.
What do you think?

Thanks.
>  soc_centriq2400 = {
> -    'description': 'Qualcomm Centriq 2400',
> +    'description': 'Qualcomm Centriq 2400 (SoC v2.0)',
>      'implementer': '0x51',
>      'part_number': '0xc00',
>      'numa': false
> --
> 2.29.2