| Message ID | 20220705133917.8405-10-ansuelsmth@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add ipq806x missing bindings | expand |
On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { > #reset-cells = <1>; > }; > > + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { > + compatible = "syscon"; syscon alone is not allowed. > + reg = <0x01200600 0x100>; > + }; > + > pcie0: pci@1b500000 { > compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064"; > reg = <0x1b500000 0x1000 > @@ -1332,4 +1337,17 @@ sdcc3: mmc@12180000 { > }; > }; > }; > + > + sfpb_mutex: sfpb-mutex { Generic node names, so hwlock > + compatible = "qcom,sfpb-mutex"; > + syscon = <&sfpb_mutex_block 4 4>; > + > + #hwlock-cells = <1>; > + }; > + > + smem { > + compatible = "qcom,smem"; > + memory-region = <&smem>; > + hwlocks = <&sfpb_mutex 3>; > + }; > }; Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:39:16AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > --- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { > > #reset-cells = <1>; > > }; > > > > + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { > > + compatible = "syscon"; > > syscon alone is not allowed. > Mh... This is problematic. How this should be handled? This should be put in sfpb_mutex and change the driver to use regs if present instead of syscon? > > + reg = <0x01200600 0x100>; > > + }; > > + > > pcie0: pci@1b500000 { > > compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064"; > > reg = <0x1b500000 0x1000 > > @@ -1332,4 +1337,17 @@ sdcc3: mmc@12180000 { > > }; > > }; > > }; > > + > > + sfpb_mutex: sfpb-mutex { > > Generic node names, so hwlock > > > + compatible = "qcom,sfpb-mutex"; > > + syscon = <&sfpb_mutex_block 4 4>; > > + > > + #hwlock-cells = <1>; > > + }; > > + > > + smem { > > + compatible = "qcom,smem"; > > + memory-region = <&smem>; > > + hwlocks = <&sfpb_mutex 3>; > > + }; > > }; > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 12:14:42PM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:39:16AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > > --- > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > > index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > > @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { > > > #reset-cells = <1>; > > > }; > > > > > > + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { > > > + compatible = "syscon"; > > > > syscon alone is not allowed. > > > > Mh... This is problematic. How this should be handled? > This should be put in sfpb_mutex and change the driver to use regs if > present instead of syscon? > Found an alternative solution used in ipq807x so I can drop the syscon only node. > > > + reg = <0x01200600 0x100>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > pcie0: pci@1b500000 { > > > compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064"; > > > reg = <0x1b500000 0x1000 > > > @@ -1332,4 +1337,17 @@ sdcc3: mmc@12180000 { > > > }; > > > }; > > > }; > > > + > > > + sfpb_mutex: sfpb-mutex { > > > > Generic node names, so hwlock > > > > > + compatible = "qcom,sfpb-mutex"; > > > + syscon = <&sfpb_mutex_block 4 4>; > > > + > > > + #hwlock-cells = <1>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + smem { > > > + compatible = "qcom,smem"; > > > + memory-region = <&smem>; > > > + hwlocks = <&sfpb_mutex 3>; > > > + }; > > > }; > > > > > > Best regards, > > Krzysztof > > -- > Ansuel
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 at 13:31, Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:39:16AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > > --- > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > > index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > > @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { > > > #reset-cells = <1>; > > > }; > > > > > > + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { > > > + compatible = "syscon"; > > > > syscon alone is not allowed. > > > > Mh... This is problematic. How this should be handled? > This should be put in sfpb_mutex and change the driver to use regs if > present instead of syscon? If nothing else works, you can add two compat strings, for example: "qcom,ipq8064-sfpb-mutex", "syscon"; This way if we add an sfpb driver at some point, we can still use old dts files.
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:11:05PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > --- > I can't find a downstream kernel for these router SoCs, but > I wonder if the 8x64 family DTs couldn't be somewhat > unified? It looks like they share quite some code.. Mhh don't know they have some peculiar changes so unifying them would make more harm than good IMHO. > > Konrad > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > > @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { > > #reset-cells = <1>; > > }; > > > > + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { > > + compatible = "syscon"; > > + reg = <0x01200600 0x100>; > > + }; > > + > > pcie0: pci@1b500000 { > > compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064"; > > reg = <0x1b500000 0x1000 > > @@ -1332,4 +1337,17 @@ sdcc3: mmc@12180000 { > > }; > > }; > > }; > > + > > + sfpb_mutex: sfpb-mutex { > > + compatible = "qcom,sfpb-mutex"; > > + syscon = <&sfpb_mutex_block 4 4>; > > + > > + #hwlock-cells = <1>; > > + }; > > + > > + smem { > > + compatible = "qcom,smem"; > > + memory-region = <&smem>; > > + hwlocks = <&sfpb_mutex 3>; > > + }; > > };
On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > --- I can't find a downstream kernel for these router SoCs, but I wonder if the 8x64 family DTs couldn't be somewhat unified? It looks like they share quite some code.. Konrad > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi > @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { > #reset-cells = <1>; > }; > > + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { > + compatible = "syscon"; > + reg = <0x01200600 0x100>; > + }; > + > pcie0: pci@1b500000 { > compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064"; > reg = <0x1b500000 0x1000 > @@ -1332,4 +1337,17 @@ sdcc3: mmc@12180000 { > }; > }; > }; > + > + sfpb_mutex: sfpb-mutex { > + compatible = "qcom,sfpb-mutex"; > + syscon = <&sfpb_mutex_block 4 4>; > + > + #hwlock-cells = <1>; > + }; > + > + smem { > + compatible = "qcom,smem"; > + memory-region = <&smem>; > + hwlocks = <&sfpb_mutex 3>; > + }; > };
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 at 16:11, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org> wrote: > > > > On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > Add missing smem node for ipq8064. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > --- > I can't find a downstream kernel for these router SoCs, but > I wonder if the 8x64 family DTs couldn't be somewhat > unified? It looks like they share quite some code.. Let's modernize them first, using the other one as an example. We can merge them afterwards. And don't forget the foster child, msm8960. >
On 06/07/2022 12:14, Christian Marangi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:39:16AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: >>> Add missing smem node for ipq8064. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> >>> Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi >>> index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi >>> @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { >>> #reset-cells = <1>; >>> }; >>> >>> + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { >>> + compatible = "syscon"; >> >> syscon alone is not allowed. >> > > Mh... This is problematic. How this should be handled? As usual - add specific compatible. Maybe I was not specific enough, but my commit was under compatible, not under device node, so it seems obvious. Just in case it is not obvious - you cannot have "syscon" compatible alone. Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi index b5aede3d7ccf..98527a7d885e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064.dtsi @@ -908,6 +908,11 @@ lcc: clock-controller@28000000 { #reset-cells = <1>; }; + sfpb_mutex_block: syscon@1200600 { + compatible = "syscon"; + reg = <0x01200600 0x100>; + }; + pcie0: pci@1b500000 { compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064"; reg = <0x1b500000 0x1000 @@ -1332,4 +1337,17 @@ sdcc3: mmc@12180000 { }; }; }; + + sfpb_mutex: sfpb-mutex { + compatible = "qcom,sfpb-mutex"; + syscon = <&sfpb_mutex_block 4 4>; + + #hwlock-cells = <1>; + }; + + smem { + compatible = "qcom,smem"; + memory-region = <&smem>; + hwlocks = <&sfpb_mutex 3>; + }; };