Am Montag, dem 17.05.2021 um 10:23 -0300 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: > On Mon, 2021-05-17 at 12:52 +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > > Hi Ezequiel, > > > > Am Sonntag, dem 16.05.2021 um 19:40 -0300 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia: > > > Hi Lucas, > > > > > > On Fri, 2021-04-16 at 12:54 +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > > > > Am Mittwoch, dem 07.04.2021 um 09:35 +0200 schrieb Benjamin Gaignard: > > > > > In order to be able to share the control hardware block between > > > > > VPUs use a syscon instead a ioremap it in the driver. > > > > > To keep the compatibility with older DT if 'nxp,imx8mq-vpu-ctrl' > > > > > phandle is not found look at 'ctrl' reg-name. > > > > > With the method it becomes useless to provide a list of register > > > > > names so remove it. > > > > > > > > Sorry for putting a spoke in the wheel after many iterations of the > > > > series. > > > > > > > > We just discussed a way forward on how to handle the clocks and resets > > > > provided by the blkctl block on i.MX8MM and later and it seems there is > > > > a consensus on trying to provide virtual power domains from a blkctl > > > > driver, controlling clocks and resets for the devices in the power > > > > domain. I would like to avoid introducing yet another way of handling > > > > the blkctl and thus would like to align the i.MX8MQ VPU blkctl with > > > > what we are planning to do on the later chip generations. > > > > > > > > CC'ing Jacky Bai and Peng Fan from NXP, as they were going to give this > > > > virtual power domain thing a shot. > > > > > > > > > > It seems the i.MX8MM BLK-CTL series are moving forward: > > > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/list/?series=479175 > > > > > > ... but I'm unable to wrap my head around how this affects the > > > devicetree VPU modelling for i.MX8MQ (and also i.MX8MM, i.MX8MP, ...). > > > > > > > > For the i.MX8MQ we want to have the same virtual power-domains provided > > by a BLK-CTRL driver for the VPUs, as on i.MX8MM. This way we should be > > able to use the same DT bindings for the VPUs on i.MX8MQ and i.MX8MM, > > even though the SoC integration with the blk-ctrl is a little > > different. > > > > AFAICS, there's not support for i.MX8MP VPU power domains. I suppose > we should make sure we'll be able to cover those as well. > > Will i.MX8MP need its own driver as well? > > I haven't looked too closely at the 8MP VPU subsystem yet, but I expect it to be slightly different again so it will need changes to the blk- ctrl driver. But that's the whole point of this virtual power domain exercise: abstract away the SoC specific things in the blk-ctrl driver, so the VPU driver doesn't need to care about them. Regards, Lucas
