On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 10:59:12AM -0700, William McVicker wrote: > On 10/05/2023, Peter Griffin wrote: > > Google gs101 SoC is ARMv8 mobile SoC found in the Pixel 6, > > (oriole) Pixel 6a (bluejay) and Pixel 6 pro (raven) mobile > > phones. It features: > > * 4xA55 little cluster > > * 2xA76 Mid cluster > > * 2xX1 Big cluster > > > > This commit adds the basic device tree for gs101 (SoC) and oriole > > (pixel 6). Further platform support will be added over time. > > > > It has been tested with a minimal busybox initramfs and boots to > > a shell. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 6 + > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile | 1 + > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/Makefile | 6 + > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101-oriole.dts | 68 + > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101-pinctrl.dtsi | 1134 +++++++++++++++++ > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101-pinctrl.h | 17 + > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101.dtsi | 501 ++++++++ > > 7 files changed, 1733 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/Makefile > > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101-oriole.dts > > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101-pinctrl.dtsi > > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101-pinctrl.h > > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/google/gs101.dtsi > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms > > index 6069120199bb..a5ed1b719488 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms > > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms > > @@ -107,6 +107,12 @@ config ARCH_EXYNOS > > help > > This enables support for ARMv8 based Samsung Exynos SoC family. > > > > +config ARCH_GOOGLE_TENSOR > > + bool "Google Tensor SoC fmaily" > > + depends on ARCH_EXYNOS > > + help > > + Support for ARMv8 based Google Tensor platforms. > > I'd like to bring up this thread and discuss the option of not introducing > another ARCH_* config: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20200306103652.GA3634389@xxxxxxxxx/ I agree, PLEASE don't add platform config options as that makes it impossible to make a unified kernel image that works for more than one platform at the same time. > I especially don't like the "depends on ARCH_EXYNOS" because that forces one to > include all the other Exynos drivers that ARCH_EXYNOS selects that Google > Tensor SoCs don't need. Can we consider using SOC_GOOGLE instead and for all > drivers that actually depend on the SoC hardware, we can just add "depends on > SOC_GOOGLE"? Why do any of this at all? It should not be needed. > The idea is that drivers should be tied to hardware -- not a specific vendor. And drivers should be auto-loaded. All of these drivers are not vendor-specific at all, they are based on the same IP blocks as others, so that is how they should be unified. > By making drivers depend on ARCH_*, you are introducing an arbitrary vendor > dependency and not a hardware dependency. Totally agree, thanks for bringing this up. greg k-h
