| Message ID | d27c4ba234cd298914676884a9604ea8472a17d0.1432290463.git.maitysanchayan@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Friday 22 May 2015 16:21:54 Sanchayan Maity wrote: > +#define OCOTP_CFG0_OFFSET 0x00000410 > +#define OCOTP_CFG1_OFFSET 0x00000420 > +#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET 0x0000002C > +#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET 0x00000014 > +#define ROM_REVISION_OFFSET 0x00000080 > + > +static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = { > + { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", }, > + { /* sentinel */ } > +}; > + > +static int __init vf610_soc_init(void) > +{ > + struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap; > + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr; > + struct soc_device *soc_dev; > + struct device_node *np; > + char soc_type[] = "xx0"; > + u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1; > + u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev; > + u64 soc_id; > + int ret; > + > + np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, vf610_soc_bus_match); > + if (!np) > + return -ENODEV; > + Why not use module_platform_driver() and make this a probe function instead? > + ocotp_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocotp"); > + if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) { > + pr_err("regmap lookup for octop failed\n"); > + return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap); > + } > + > + mscm_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg"); > + if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) { > + pr_err("regmap lookup for mscm failed"); > + return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap); > + } > + > + rom_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocrom"); > + if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) { > + pr_err("regmap lookup for ocrom failed"); > + return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap); > + } Can you use syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle instead, and put the phandles in the fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg node? Also, I'd argue that the mscm should not be a syscon device at all, but instead I'd use platform_get_resource()/devm_ioremap_resource() to get an __iomem pointer. Arnd
Hello Arnd, On 15-05-22 13:11:46, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 22 May 2015 16:21:54 Sanchayan Maity wrote: > > +#define OCOTP_CFG0_OFFSET 0x00000410 > > +#define OCOTP_CFG1_OFFSET 0x00000420 > > +#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET 0x0000002C > > +#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET 0x00000014 > > +#define ROM_REVISION_OFFSET 0x00000080 > > + > > +static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = { > > + { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", }, > > + { /* sentinel */ } > > +}; > > + > > +static int __init vf610_soc_init(void) > > +{ > > + struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap; > > + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr; > > + struct soc_device *soc_dev; > > + struct device_node *np; > > + char soc_type[] = "xx0"; > > + u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1; > > + u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev; > > + u64 soc_id; > > + int ret; > > + > > + np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, vf610_soc_bus_match); > > + if (!np) > > + return -ENODEV; > > + > > Why not use module_platform_driver() and make this a probe function instead? Had done that but after having a look at the existing integrator and versatile platform implementation, I changed it. Will switch to using that. > > > + ocotp_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocotp"); > > + if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) { > > + pr_err("regmap lookup for octop failed\n"); > > + return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap); > > + } > > + > > + mscm_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg"); > > + if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) { > > + pr_err("regmap lookup for mscm failed"); > > + return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap); > > + } > > + > > + rom_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocrom"); > > + if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) { > > + pr_err("regmap lookup for ocrom failed"); > > + return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap); > > + } > > Can you use syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle instead, and put the > phandles in the fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg node? Ok. Will do so. - Sanchayan. > > Also, I'd argue that the mscm should not be a syscon device at all, > but instead I'd use platform_get_resource()/devm_ioremap_resource() > to get an __iomem pointer. > > Arnd
On 2015-05-22 13:11, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 22 May 2015 16:21:54 Sanchayan Maity wrote: >> +#define OCOTP_CFG0_OFFSET 0x00000410 >> +#define OCOTP_CFG1_OFFSET 0x00000420 >> +#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET 0x0000002C >> +#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET 0x00000014 >> +#define ROM_REVISION_OFFSET 0x00000080 >> + >> +static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = { >> + { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", }, >> + { /* sentinel */ } >> +}; >> + >> +static int __init vf610_soc_init(void) >> +{ >> + struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap; >> + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr; >> + struct soc_device *soc_dev; >> + struct device_node *np; >> + char soc_type[] = "xx0"; >> + u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1; >> + u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev; >> + u64 soc_id; >> + int ret; >> + >> + np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, vf610_soc_bus_match); >> + if (!np) >> + return -ENODEV; >> + > > Why not use module_platform_driver() and make this a probe function instead? > >> + ocotp_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocotp"); >> + if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) { >> + pr_err("regmap lookup for octop failed\n"); >> + return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap); >> + } >> + >> + mscm_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg"); >> + if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) { >> + pr_err("regmap lookup for mscm failed"); >> + return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap); >> + } >> + >> + rom_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocrom"); >> + if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) { >> + pr_err("regmap lookup for ocrom failed"); >> + return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap); >> + } > > Can you use syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle instead, and put the > phandles in the fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg node? Hm, with that we would wire up hardware modules which does nothing has to do with each other. We just happen to need a driver which collects information accross the SoC. I'm not sure we should put the modules required into the device tree. I don't think its nice to have the compatible strings in the source code, however it feels more appropriate than in the device tree, IMHO... > Also, I'd argue that the mscm should not be a syscon device at all, > but instead I'd use platform_get_resource()/devm_ioremap_resource() > to get an __iomem pointer. We need to have mscm-cpucfg to be syscon because we need to get the CPU personality in the MSCM interrupt router driver (irq-vf610-mscm-ir.c). -- Stefan
On Friday 22 May 2015 14:02:52 Stefan Agner wrote: > > Can you use syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle instead, and put the > > phandles in the fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg node? > > Hm, with that we would wire up hardware modules which does nothing has > to do with each other. We just happen to need a driver which collects > information accross the SoC. I'm not sure we should put the modules > required into the device tree. > > I don't think its nice to have the compatible strings in the source > code, however it feels more appropriate than in the device tree, IMHO... I see. Another option would be to point directly to the registers you need: ocotp-cfg0 = <&ocotp 0x10>; ocotp-cfg1 = <&ocotp 0x20>; rom-revision = <&rom 0x80>; We don't yet have an abstraction to access a register from a syscon reference like this, but you could either roll your own here, or add a generic abstraction. > > Also, I'd argue that the mscm should not be a syscon device at all, > > but instead I'd use platform_get_resource()/devm_ioremap_resource() > > to get an __iomem pointer. > > We need to have mscm-cpucfg to be syscon because we need to get the CPU > personality in the MSCM interrupt router driver (irq-vf610-mscm-ir.c). It can be both at the same time now. Arnd
Hello Arnd, On 15-05-22 15:20:00, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 22 May 2015 14:02:52 Stefan Agner wrote: > > > Can you use syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle instead, and put the > > > phandles in the fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg node? > > > > Hm, with that we would wire up hardware modules which does nothing has > > to do with each other. We just happen to need a driver which collects > > information accross the SoC. I'm not sure we should put the modules > > required into the device tree. > > > > I don't think its nice to have the compatible strings in the source > > code, however it feels more appropriate than in the device tree, IMHO... > > I see. Another option would be to point directly to the registers > you need: > > ocotp-cfg0 = <&ocotp 0x10>; > ocotp-cfg1 = <&ocotp 0x20>; > rom-revision = <&rom 0x80>; > > We don't yet have an abstraction to access a register from a syscon > reference like this, but you could either roll your own here, or > add a generic abstraction. Can you tell me a little about how can I start implementing it? I am not clear on how to approach this. > > > > Also, I'd argue that the mscm should not be a syscon device at all, > > > but instead I'd use platform_get_resource()/devm_ioremap_resource() > > > to get an __iomem pointer. > > > > We need to have mscm-cpucfg to be syscon because we need to get the CPU > > personality in the MSCM interrupt router driver (irq-vf610-mscm-ir.c). > > It can be both at the same time now. > > Arnd Regards, Sanchayan.
diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig index d8bde82..8b4dd2b 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers" +source "drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig" source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig" source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig" source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig" diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile index 70042b2..142676e 100644 --- a/drivers/soc/Makefile +++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ # Makefile for the Linux Kernel SOC specific device drivers. # +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_VF610) += fsl/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK) += mediatek/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM) += qcom/ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra/ diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d0ac671 --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +# +# Freescale SoC drivers + +config SOC_VF610 + bool "SoC bus device for the Freescale Vybrid platform" + select SOC_BUS + help + Include support for the SoC bus on the Freescale Vybrid platform + providing some sysfs information about the module variant. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile b/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5fccbba --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_VF610) += soc-vf610.o diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c b/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..faeb567 --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@ +/* + * Copyright 2015 Toradex AG + * + * Author: Sanchayan Maity <sanchayan.maity@toradex.com> + * + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2, as + * published by the Free Software Foundation. + * + */ + +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h> +#include <linux/module.h> +#include <linux/of_platform.h> +#include <linux/regmap.h> +#include <linux/random.h> +#include <linux/slab.h> +#include <linux/sys_soc.h> + +#define OCOTP_CFG0_OFFSET 0x00000410 +#define OCOTP_CFG1_OFFSET 0x00000420 +#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET 0x0000002C +#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET 0x00000014 +#define ROM_REVISION_OFFSET 0x00000080 + +static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = { + { .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", }, + { /* sentinel */ } +}; + +static int __init vf610_soc_init(void) +{ + struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap; + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr; + struct soc_device *soc_dev; + struct device_node *np; + char soc_type[] = "xx0"; + u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1; + u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev; + u64 soc_id; + int ret; + + np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, vf610_soc_bus_match); + if (!np) + return -ENODEV; + + ocotp_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocotp"); + if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) { + pr_err("regmap lookup for octop failed\n"); + return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap); + } + + mscm_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg"); + if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) { + pr_err("regmap lookup for mscm failed"); + return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap); + } + + rom_regmap = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,vf610-ocrom"); + if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) { + pr_err("regmap lookup for ocrom failed"); + return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap); + } + + ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, OCOTP_CFG0_OFFSET, &soc_id1); + if (ret) + return -ENODEV; + + ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, OCOTP_CFG1_OFFSET, &soc_id2); + if (ret) + return -ENODEV; + + soc_id = (u64) soc_id1 << 32 | soc_id2; + add_device_randomness(&soc_id, sizeof(soc_id)); + + ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET, &cpxcount); + if (ret) + return -ENODEV; + + ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET, &cpxcfg1); + if (ret) + return -ENODEV; + + soc_type[0] = cpxcount ? '6' : '5'; /* Dual Core => VF6x0 */ + soc_type[1] = cpxcfg1 ? '1' : '0'; /* L2 Cache => VFx10 */ + + ret = regmap_read(rom_regmap, ROM_REVISION_OFFSET, &rom_rev); + if (ret) + return -ENODEV; + + soc_dev_attr = kzalloc(sizeof(*soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!soc_dev_attr) + return -ENOMEM; + + soc_dev_attr->machine = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid"); + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%016llx", soc_id); + soc_dev_attr->family = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid VF%s", + soc_type); + soc_dev_attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%08x", rom_rev); + + soc_dev = soc_device_register(soc_dev_attr); + if (IS_ERR(soc_dev)) { + kfree(soc_dev_attr->revision); + kfree(soc_dev_attr->family); + kfree(soc_dev_attr->soc_id); + kfree(soc_dev_attr->machine); + kfree(soc_dev_attr); + return -ENODEV; + } + + return 0; +} +device_initcall(vf610_soc_init);