Dear Mark,
On 12/02/2014 08:09 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 08:49:51AM +0000, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>> This patch adds new Exynos5433 dtsi to support 64-bit Exynos5433 SoC based on
>> Octal core CPUs (quad Cortex-A57 and quad Cortex-A53). And Exynos5433 supports
>> PSCI (Power State Coordination Interface) v0.1.
>>
>> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Geunsik Lim <geunsik.lim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433-pinctrl.dtsi | 698 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 515 +++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 1213 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433-pinctrl.dtsi
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi
>
> [...]
>
>> + cpus {
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> + cpu0: cpu@100 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x100>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu1: cpu@101 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x101>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu2: cpu@102 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x0 0x102>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu3: cpu@103 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x103>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu4: cpu@0 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a57", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x0>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu5: cpu@1 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a57", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x1>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu6: cpu@2 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a57", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x2>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + cpu7: cpu@3 {
>> + device_type = "cpu";
>> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a57", "arm,armv8";
>> + enable-method = "psci";
>> + reg = <0x3>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + psci {
>> + compatible = "arm,psci";
>> + method = "smc";
>> + cpu_off = <0x84000002>;
>> + cpu_on = <0xC4000003>;
>> + };
>
> Given your comments on the latest posting, has CPU_OFF been tested, and
> does it work for _all_ CPUs (including CPU0)?
At current version,
CPU_OFF of Exynos5433 is not working. I'm now working to find the cause of CPU_OFF fail.
(I got CPU_ON of Exynos5433 all cores.)
>
>> +
>> + soc: soc {
>> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges;
>
> Is that valid when changing the number of cells? The address spaces
> aren't strictly identical in that case, and I'd expect a translation
> something like:
>
> ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0xff000000>;
I'll fix it after checking correct spec.
>
> Where the final cell is a sufficiently large value to cover all
> addresses in the soc node.
>
> [...]
>
>> + gic:interrupt-controller@11001000 {
>> + compatible = "arm,gic-400";
>> + #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>> + interrupt-controller;
>> + reg = <0x11001000 0x1000>,
>> + <0x11002000 0x1000>,
>> + <0x11004000 0x2000>,
>> + <0x11006000 0x2000>;
>> + interrupts = <1 9 0xf04>;
>> + };
>
> The GICC needs to be 0x2000 long to map the GICC_DIR, which is at
> 0x1000-0x1003.
Do you mean that following dt node is right for gic-400?
reg = <0x11001000 0x1000>,
<0x11002000 0x2000>, <- I changed the the range of GICC.
<0x11004000 0x2000>,
<0x11006000 0x2000>;
>
> [...]
>
>> + pinctrl_alive: pinctrl@10580000 {
>> + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-pinctrl";
>> + reg = <0x10580000 0x1000>;
>> +
>> + wakeup-interrupt-controller {
>> + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint";
>> + interrupts = <0 16 0>;
>> + };
>> + };
>
> How exactly does the wakeup interrupt controller interact with the GIC?
> Surely the relationship between the two should be described?
The pinctrl_alive contains the alive part of GPIO PAD (gpa0~gpa3).
The each GPA0/GPA1 of pinctrl_alive pad did map to unique SPI number of GIC
amd GPA2/GPA3 use only one interrupt (SPI[16]) as following:
+&pinctrl_alive {
+ gpa0: gpa0 {
+ gpio-controller;
+ #gpio-cells = <2>;
+
+ interrupt-controller;
+ interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
+ interrupts = <0 0 0>, <0 1 0>, <0 2 0>, <0 3 0>,
+ <0 4 0>, <0 5 0>, <0 6 0>, <0 7 0>;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
+
+ gpa1: gpa1 {
+ gpio-controller;
+ #gpio-cells = <2>;
+
+ interrupt-controller;
+ interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
+ interrupts = <0 8 0>, <0 9 0>, <0 10 0>, <0 11 0>,
+ <0 12 0>, <0 13 0>, <0 14 0>, <0 15 0>;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
gpa0-0 - SPI[0]
gpa0-1 - SPI[1]
gpa0-2 - SPI[2]
gpa0-3 - SPI[3]
gpa0-4 - SPI[4]
gpa0-5 - SPI[5]
gpa0-6 - SPI[6]
gpa0-7 - SPI[7]
gpa1-0 - SPI[8]
gpa1-1 - SPI[9]
gpa1-2 - SPI[10]
gpa1-3 - SPI[11]
gpa1-4 - SPI[12]
gpa1-5 - SPI[13]
gpa1-6 - SPI[14]
gpa1-7 - SPI[15]
GPA2/GPA3 use only one interrupt (SPI[16]).
The pinctrl-exynos.c driver initialized external wakeup interrupt
(e.g., GPA0/GPA1/GPA2/GPA3 of Exynos5433) in exynos_eint_wkup_init() function.
Following patch[1] adds the control for Exynos5433 wakeup irq.The exynos5433_pin_ctrl structure
includes '.eint_wkup_init = exynos_eint_wkup_init;' fields to handle wakeup interrupt of Exynos SoC.
[PATCHv2] pinctrl: exynos: Add support for Exynos543
- https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/2/207
+struct samsung_pin_ctrl exynos5433_pin_ctrl[] = {
+ {
+ /* pin-controller instance 0 data */
+ .pin_banks = exynos5433_pin_banks0,
+ .nr_banks = ARRAY_SIZE(exynos5433_pin_banks0),
+ .eint_wkup_init = exynos_eint_wkup_init,
+ .suspend = exynos_pinctrl_suspend,
+ .resume = exynos_pinctrl_resume,
+ .label = "exynos5433-gpio-ctrl0",
+ }, {
And,
'struct exynos_irq_chip exynos7_wkup_irq_chip' handles the external interrupt of Exynos5433 SoC
because Exynos5433 is the same with Exynos7 EINT (External Interrupt) register offset.
We can check it following patch[1] to control wakeup interrupt for Exynos7/Exynos5433.
- [1] [patch] pinctrl: exynos: Add irq_chip instance for Exynos7 wakeup interrupts
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-pinctrl.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=14c255d35b25126149fb2fd199b030404229af65
+static struct exynos_irq_chip exynos7_wkup_irq_chip __initdata = {
+ .chip = {
+ .name = "exynos7_wkup_irq_chip",
+ .irq_unmask = exynos_irq_unmask,
+ .irq_mask = exynos_irq_mask,
+ .irq_ack = exynos_irq_ack,
+ .irq_set_type = exynos_irq_set_type,
+ .irq_set_wake = exynos_wkup_irq_set_wake,
+ .irq_request_resources = exynos_irq_request_resources,
+ .irq_release_resources = exynos_irq_release_resources,
+ },
+ .eint_con = EXYNOS7_WKUP_ECON_OFFSET,
+ .eint_mask = EXYNOS7_WKUP_EMASK_OFFSET,
+ .eint_pend = EXYNOS7_WKUP_EPEND_OFFSET,
+};
If happen external interrupt by pressing power button, the ops of 'struct exynos_irq_chip exynos7_wkup_irq_chip'
would handle the interrupt.
For exampl, If I use following GPAx as interrupt, I can check it on the result of /proc/interrupts.
gpa2-7 - power key
gpa2-0 - volume-up key
gpa2-1 - volume-up key
gpa0-7 - s2mps13 pmic irq
'exynos7_wkup_irq_chip' would handle the external interrupt(gpa).
#cat /proc/interrupts
1: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 exynos7_wkup_irq_chip 0 volume-up key
2: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 exynos7_wkup_irq_chip 1 volume-down key
7: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 exynos7_wkup_irq_chip 7 s2mps13
8: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 exynos7_wkup_irq_chip 7 power key
IMHO,
Happen SPI -> GIC -> Cortex-A57/Cortex-A53 -> pinctrl-exynos.c -> exynos7_wkup_irq_chip -> irq handling
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi
>
> Is it a subcomponent of the pincontrol block?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
