diff mbox series

[v5,04/13] dt-bindings: memory-controllers: add canaan k210 sram controller

Message ID 20220705215213.1802496-5-mail@conchuod.ie (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series Canaan devicetree fixes | expand

Commit Message

Conor Dooley July 5, 2022, 9:52 p.m. UTC 
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
the same compatible string & document it.

Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
---
 .../memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml  | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml

Comments

Rob Herring July 6, 2022, 2:48 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, 05 Jul 2022 22:52:05 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
> devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
> dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
> the same compatible string & document it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
>  .../memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml  | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
> 

Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Conor Dooley July 10, 2022, 7:39 p.m. UTC | #2 
Damien, Krzysztof,

I know this particular version has not been posted for all that
long, but this binding is (functionally) unchanged for a few
versions now. Are you happy with this approach Damien?
U-Boot only cares about the compatible & the clocks property,
not the regs etc.

I (lazily) tested it in U-Boot with the following diff:

diff --git a/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi b/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
index 3cc8379133..314db88340 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
+++ b/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
@@ -82,11 +82,14 @@
 
        sram: memory@80000000 {
                device_type = "memory";
+               reg = <0x80000000 0x400000>, /* sram0 4 MiB */
+                     <0x80400000 0x200000>, /* sram1 2 MiB */
+                     <0x80600000 0x200000>; /* aisram 2 MiB */
+               u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
+       };
+
+       sram_controller: memory-controller {
                compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
-               reg = <0x80000000 0x400000>,
-                     <0x80400000 0x200000>,
-                     <0x80600000 0x200000>;
-               reg-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
                clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
                         <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
                         <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;

If so, could you queue this for 5.20 please Krzysztof, unless
you've got concerns about it?

Thanks,
Conor.

On 05/07/2022 22:52, Conor Dooley wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
> devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
> dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
> the same compatible string & document it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
>  .../memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml  | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f81fb866e319
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller
> +
> +description:
> +  The Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller is responsible for the system's 8 MiB
> +  of SRAM. The controller is initialised by the bootloader, which configures
> +  its clocks, before OS bringup.
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    enum:
> +      - canaan,k210-sram
> +
> +  clocks:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    items:
> +      - description: sram0 clock
> +      - description: sram1 clock
> +      - description: aisram clock
> +
> +  clock-names:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    items:
> +      - const: sram0
> +      - const: sram1
> +      - const: aisram
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - clocks
> +  - clock-names
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    #include <dt-bindings/clock/k210-clk.h>
> +    memory-controller {
> +        compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
> +        clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
> +                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
> +                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;
> +        clock-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
> +    };
> --
> 2.37.0
>
Damien Le Moal July 10, 2022, 11:21 p.m. UTC | #3 
On 7/11/22 04:39, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
> Damien, Krzysztof,
> 
> I know this particular version has not been posted for all that
> long, but this binding is (functionally) unchanged for a few
> versions now. Are you happy with this approach Damien?
> U-Boot only cares about the compatible & the clocks property,
> not the regs etc.
> 
> I (lazily) tested it in U-Boot with the following diff:

If both the kernel and u-boot still work as expected with this change, I
am OK with it.

> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi b/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
> index 3cc8379133..314db88340 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
> @@ -82,11 +82,14 @@
>  
>         sram: memory@80000000 {
>                 device_type = "memory";
> +               reg = <0x80000000 0x400000>, /* sram0 4 MiB */
> +                     <0x80400000 0x200000>, /* sram1 2 MiB */
> +                     <0x80600000 0x200000>; /* aisram 2 MiB */
> +               u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
> +       };
> +
> +       sram_controller: memory-controller {
>                 compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
> -               reg = <0x80000000 0x400000>,
> -                     <0x80400000 0x200000>,
> -                     <0x80600000 0x200000>;
> -               reg-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
>                 clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
>                          <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
>                          <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;
> 
> If so, could you queue this for 5.20 please Krzysztof, unless
> you've got concerns about it?
> 
> Thanks,
> Conor.
> 
> On 05/07/2022 22:52, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>
>> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>
>> The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
>> devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
>> dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
>> the same compatible string & document it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>> ---
>>  .../memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml  | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..f81fb866e319
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
>> @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>> +%YAML 1.2
>> +---
>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml#
>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>> +
>> +title: Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller
>> +
>> +description:
>> +  The Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller is responsible for the system's 8 MiB
>> +  of SRAM. The controller is initialised by the bootloader, which configures
>> +  its clocks, before OS bringup.
>> +
>> +maintainers:
>> +  - Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
>> +
>> +properties:
>> +  compatible:
>> +    enum:
>> +      - canaan,k210-sram
>> +
>> +  clocks:
>> +    minItems: 1
>> +    items:
>> +      - description: sram0 clock
>> +      - description: sram1 clock
>> +      - description: aisram clock
>> +
>> +  clock-names:
>> +    minItems: 1
>> +    items:
>> +      - const: sram0
>> +      - const: sram1
>> +      - const: aisram
>> +
>> +required:
>> +  - compatible
>> +  - clocks
>> +  - clock-names
>> +
>> +additionalProperties: false
>> +
>> +examples:
>> +  - |
>> +    #include <dt-bindings/clock/k210-clk.h>
>> +    memory-controller {
>> +        compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
>> +        clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
>> +                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
>> +                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;
>> +        clock-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
>> +    };
>> --
>> 2.37.0
>>
>
Conor Dooley July 12, 2022, 3:54 p.m. UTC | #4 
On 11/07/2022 00:21, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 7/11/22 04:39, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
>> Damien, Krzysztof,
>>
>> I know this particular version has not been posted for all that
>> long, but this binding is (functionally) unchanged for a few
>> versions now. Are you happy with this approach Damien?
>> U-Boot only cares about the compatible & the clocks property,
>> not the regs etc.
>>
>> I (lazily) tested it in U-Boot with the following diff:
> 
> If both the kernel and u-boot still work as expected with this change, I
> am OK with it.

It's all yours so Krzysztof :)

Thanks,
Conor.

> 
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi b/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
>> index 3cc8379133..314db88340 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/dts/k210.dtsi
>> @@ -82,11 +82,14 @@
>>  
>>         sram: memory@80000000 {
>>                 device_type = "memory";
>> +               reg = <0x80000000 0x400000>, /* sram0 4 MiB */
>> +                     <0x80400000 0x200000>, /* sram1 2 MiB */
>> +                     <0x80600000 0x200000>; /* aisram 2 MiB */
>> +               u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
>> +       };
>> +
>> +       sram_controller: memory-controller {
>>                 compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
>> -               reg = <0x80000000 0x400000>,
>> -                     <0x80400000 0x200000>,
>> -                     <0x80600000 0x200000>;
>> -               reg-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
>>                 clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
>>                          <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
>>                          <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;
>>
>> If so, could you queue this for 5.20 please Krzysztof, unless
>> you've got concerns about it?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Conor.
>>
>> On 05/07/2022 22:52, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>>
>>> The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
>>> devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
>>> dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
>>> the same compatible string & document it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml  | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..f81fb866e319
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>> +---
>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml#
>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>> +
>>> +title: Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller
>>> +
>>> +description:
>>> +  The Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller is responsible for the system's 8 MiB
>>> +  of SRAM. The controller is initialised by the bootloader, which configures
>>> +  its clocks, before OS bringup.
>>> +
>>> +maintainers:
>>> +  - Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - canaan,k210-sram
>>> +
>>> +  clocks:
>>> +    minItems: 1
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: sram0 clock
>>> +      - description: sram1 clock
>>> +      - description: aisram clock
>>> +
>>> +  clock-names:
>>> +    minItems: 1
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - const: sram0
>>> +      - const: sram1
>>> +      - const: aisram
>>> +
>>> +required:
>>> +  - compatible
>>> +  - clocks
>>> +  - clock-names
>>> +
>>> +additionalProperties: false
>>> +
>>> +examples:
>>> +  - |
>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/clock/k210-clk.h>
>>> +    memory-controller {
>>> +        compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
>>> +        clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
>>> +                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
>>> +                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;
>>> +        clock-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
>>> +    };
>>> --
>>> 2.37.0
>>>
>>
> 
>
Krzysztof Kozlowski July 12, 2022, 3:59 p.m. UTC | #5 
On 12/07/2022 17:54, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
> On 11/07/2022 00:21, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 7/11/22 04:39, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
>>> Damien, Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> I know this particular version has not been posted for all that
>>> long, but this binding is (functionally) unchanged for a few
>>> versions now. Are you happy with this approach Damien?
>>> U-Boot only cares about the compatible & the clocks property,
>>> not the regs etc.
>>>
>>> I (lazily) tested it in U-Boot with the following diff:
>>
>> If both the kernel and u-boot still work as expected with this change, I
>> am OK with it.
> 
> It's all yours so Krzysztof :)

It's too late in the cycle for me to pick it up. If you have alternate
tree to take it through, go ahead with:

Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

Otherwise, I'll take it after the merge window of v5.20, so in ~1 month
according to crystal ball.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Conor Dooley July 12, 2022, 4:04 p.m. UTC | #6 
On 12/07/2022 16:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 12/07/2022 17:54, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
>> On 11/07/2022 00:21, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>> On 7/11/22 04:39, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:
>>>> Damien, Krzysztof,
>>>>
>>>> I know this particular version has not been posted for all that
>>>> long, but this binding is (functionally) unchanged for a few
>>>> versions now. Are you happy with this approach Damien?
>>>> U-Boot only cares about the compatible & the clocks property,
>>>> not the regs etc.
>>>>
>>>> I (lazily) tested it in U-Boot with the following diff:
>>>
>>> If both the kernel and u-boot still work as expected with this change, I
>>> am OK with it.
>>
>> It's all yours so Krzysztof :)
> 
> It's too late in the cycle for me to pick it up. If you have alternate
> tree to take it through, go ahead with:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> 
> Otherwise, I'll take it after the merge window of v5.20, so in ~1 month
> according to crystal ball.


Cool, thanks Krzysztof. I know it is late in the game for v5.20.
Part of me is hoping that Palmer can take it with the dts patches,
going to bump all the outstanding & reviewed riscv dts patches when
I send my PR this weekend.

If not, I'll remind you in a month. Thanks,
Conor.
Krzysztof Kozlowski Aug. 16, 2022, 9:27 a.m. UTC | #7 
On 06/07/2022 00:52, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
> devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
> dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
> the same compatible string & document it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---

Does not apply to my tree. Please rebase and resend.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Conor Dooley Aug. 16, 2022, 9:31 a.m. UTC | #8 
On 16/08/2022 10:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On 06/07/2022 00:52, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>>
>> The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
>> devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
>> dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
>> the same compatible string & document it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>> ---
> 
> Does not apply to my tree. Please rebase and resend.

Palmer took it with the rest of the canaan stuff as per:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/eeed43cf-7bd6-9d77-9e1f-e018a236a058@linaro.org/

It is now in v6.0-rc1:
commit 727b05e46cffd74adca96ca13e57352339875586
Author: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Date:   Tue Jul 5 22:52:05 2022 +0100

     dt-bindings: memory-controllers: add canaan k210 sram controller
     
     The k210 U-Boot port has been using the clocks defined in the
     devicetree to bring up the board's SRAM, but this violates the
     dt-schema. As such, move the clocks to a dedicated node with
     the same compatible string & document it.
     
     Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
     Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
     Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
     Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220705215213.1802496-5-mail@conchuod.ie
     Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..f81fb866e319
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ 
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memory-controllers/canaan,k210-sram.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller
+
+description:
+  The Canaan K210 SRAM memory controller is responsible for the system's 8 MiB
+  of SRAM. The controller is initialised by the bootloader, which configures
+  its clocks, before OS bringup.
+
+maintainers:
+  - Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
+
+properties:
+  compatible:
+    enum:
+      - canaan,k210-sram
+
+  clocks:
+    minItems: 1
+    items:
+      - description: sram0 clock
+      - description: sram1 clock
+      - description: aisram clock
+
+  clock-names:
+    minItems: 1
+    items:
+      - const: sram0
+      - const: sram1
+      - const: aisram
+
+required:
+  - compatible
+  - clocks
+  - clock-names
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+  - |
+    #include <dt-bindings/clock/k210-clk.h>
+    memory-controller {
+        compatible = "canaan,k210-sram";
+        clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM0>,
+                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_SRAM1>,
+                 <&sysclk K210_CLK_AI>;
+        clock-names = "sram0", "sram1", "aisram";
+    };