On 15/08/23 12:29, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: > > > On 15/08/23 02:24, Andrew Davis wrote: >> On 8/14/23 2:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 12/08/2023 00:49, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>>> Hi Vignesh Raghavendra, >>>> >>>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2023 00:14:29 +0530, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: >>>>> This series adds basic support for AM62P family of SoCs and >>>>> specifically >>>>> AM62P5 variant. Also adds AM62P5-SK support with basic peripheral >>>>> like UART. >>>>> >>>>> TRM at [0] and Schematics is at [1] >>>>> >>>>> [0]: https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/spruj83 >>>>> [1]: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/sprr487 >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> Note: since the changes were trivial, I incorporated the cosmetic >>>> fixup suggested by Andrew locally when I applied. I have also dropped >>>> bootph property from board's reserved nodes inline with what we did >>>> for j721s2[2]. Thanks for the bootlog. >>>> >>>> I have applied the following to branch ti-k3-dts-next on [1]. >>>> Thank you! >>>> >>>> [1/3] dt-bindings: arm: ti: Add bindings for AM62P5 SoCs >>>> commit: b57fc5cbdbdfd04d44697800a9d59aeb3be2f273 >>>> [2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Introduce AM62P5 family of SoCs >>>> commit: 29075cc09f43a024d962da66d2e4f9eb577713d0 >>>> [3/3] arm64: dts: ti: Add support for the AM62P5 Starter Kit >>>> commit: 935c4047d42e53a06ec768ddc495a44f6869209c >>>> >>> >>> A bit too fast. simple-mfd *is not allowed* on its own. >>> >> We have the rule against ['syscon', 'simple-mfd'], which requires a 3rd >> specific compatible, but it seems 'simple-mfd' is allowed in the same way >> as "simple-bus" (not sure how or why, I would expect a `failed to match any >> schema with compatible`, but I'm not getting that either?). >> > > Indeed, I didn't see any warnings from dtbs_check so far > >> We can add something like simple-mfd.yaml for this to explicitly check that >> the compatible has minItems: 2. >> >> But in this case these seem to be just a typo and we meant "simple-bus" >> here, >> then it got copy/pasted over our k3 tree. >> > > I dont think "simple-bus" is enough due to presence to TI specific > property (ti,sci-dev-id). So this will warrant a separate yaml bindings. > I will work towards adding such a file. Unfortunately that cannot be dropped, it indicates the navss instance to be used during PSIL pairing [0] (PSIL proxy to use). Looking again at simple-bus.yaml in dt-schema repo, I do see arbitrary properties are accepted [1]. But I am not sure if its means device specific properties are acceptable? [0] https://software-dl.ti.com/tisci/esd/latest/2_tisci_msgs/rm/rm_psil.html [1] https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/blob/main/dtschema/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#L60 > -- Regards Vignesh
