Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add nRF51 DETECT signal with test

[Peter Maydell]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 at 04:25, Chris Laplante <chris@laplante.io> wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> > Thanks for this patchset and especially for the work
> > improving the qtest infrastructure. I've given my
> > comments on the different patches, and in some cases
> > reviewed-by tags. (Where I've given one of those, you should
> > add it to your commit message for the relevant patch under
> > your Signed-off-by: line, so that when you send the version
> > 2 of the patchset we know that those parts are already
> > reviewed and don't need re-examining. If I said "make
> > some change; otherwise Reviewed-by" that means "make
> > that minor change, and then you can add the tag, etc".)
>
> Thanks very much for the feedback and help!
>
> > Do you have the parts of this feature that use the DETECT
> > signal in the POWER device, or have you not written those
> > yet ? If you have them, you could send those too in v2.
>
> That part is halfway done, so I will work on finishing it before submitting 
> v2. Two questions regarding that (to potentially save us a v3):
>
> 1. The nRF51 POWER device overlaps with the memory maps of the CLOCK and MPU 
> devices. So I have created a CPM (CLOCK, POWER, MPU) device in hw/misc. Does 
> that sound reasonable naming-wise?

Yes, I think from QEMU's point of view the massive register
overlap makes them a single device. The name sounds OK
(give it the same kind of nrf51 prefix the rng device has).

> 2. I also have some implementations for pieces of CLOCK, namely the 
> HFCLKSTART/HFCLKSTOP events and HFCLKSTARTED event. Should I include that in 
> this patch series, or would you prefer it in a separate series? It is 
> unrelated to DETECT and POWER.

If you think they're ready to go in, and it doesn't
make the series more than about 12-15 patches long,
you can put them on the end of the series. If the
patchset is starting to get a bit big then it might
be easier to get the POWER/DETECT parts reviewed
first.

thanks
-- PMM