On Tue, 23 May 2023 09:28:39 +0100
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 10:56:43AM +0800, Xingyu Wu wrote:
> > On 2023/5/19 22:16, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 03:57:33PM +0200, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > >> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 10:20:30AM +0800, Xingyu Wu wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >> > +/* PLL clocks */
> > >> > +#define JH7110_CLK_PLL0_OUT 0
> > >> > +#define JH7110_CLK_PLL1_OUT 1
> > >> > +#define JH7110_CLK_PLL2_OUT 2
> > >>
> > >> In U-Boot commit 58c9c60b Yanhong Wang added:
> > >>
> > >> +
> > >> +#define JH7110_SYSCLK_PLL0_OUT 190
> > >> +#define JH7110_SYSCLK_PLL1_OUT 191
> > >> +#define JH7110_SYSCLK_PLL2_OUT 192
> > >> +
> > >> +#define JH7110_SYSCLK_END 193
[...]
> > > Ohh, that's not good.. If you pass the U-Boot dtb to Linux it
> > > won't understand the numbering. The headers are part of the
> > > dt-binding :/
In fact, the clock index >= 190 makes linux hang on boot, waiting with
EPROBE_DEFER for every device's clock, because the sysclk driver errors
out with EINVAL (jh7110_sysclk_get()).
> > Because PLL driver is separated from SYSCRG drivers in Linux, the
> > numbering starts from 0. But in Uboot, the PLL driver is included
> > in the SYSCRG driver, and the number follows the SYSCRG.
>
> Unfortunately, how you choose to construct your drivers has nothing to
> do with this.
> These defines/numbers appear in the dts and are part of the DT ABI.
> The same dts is supposed to work for Linux & U-Boot.
The JH7110 has 6 blocks of 64k iomem in that functional area:
{SYS,STG,AON} x {CRG,SYSCON}. None of these has 190 clocks.
The good news: the current DTS, as proposed here and in U-Boot master,
provides nodes for all 6 entities. The bad news is that the clock
assignments to those nodes and their numbering is messed up.
AFAICT PLL{0,1,2} _are_ generated in SYS_SYSCON and thus U-Boot gets it
wrong, in addition to the erroneous DTS.
Torsten
