On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 02:02:21PM +0530, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 12:18:10PM +0530, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 08:40:19AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 03/04/2024 08:32, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 08:27:06AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > >> On 03/04/2024 07:35, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > > >>> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 08:06:27PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > >>>> On 02/04/2024 14:30, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 02:08:32PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On 02/04/2024 12:57, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> The CTRLMMR_MAC_IDx registers within the CTRL_MMR space of TI's AM62p SoC
> > > >>>>>>> contain the MAC Address programmed in the eFuse. Add compatible for
> > > >>>>>>> allowing the CPSW driver to obtain a regmap for the CTRLMMR_MAC_IDx
> > > >>>>>>> registers within the System Controller device-tree node. The default MAC
> > > >>>>>>> Address for the interface corresponding to the first MAC port will be set
> > > >>>>>>> to the value programmed in the eFuse.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@xxxxxx>
> > > >>>>>>> ---
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> This patch is based on linux-next tagged next-20240402.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Where is the DTS using it?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The current implementation in the device-tree for older TI K3 SoCs is as
> > > >>>>> follows:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> cpsw_port1: port@1 {
> > > >>>>> reg = <1>;
> > > >>>>> ti,mac-only;
> > > >>>>> label = "port1";
> > > >>>>> phys = <&phy_gmii_sel 1>;
> > > >>>>> mac-address = [00 00 00 00 00 00];
> > > >>>>> ti,syscon-efuse = <&wkup_conf 0x200>;
> > > >>>>> };
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The "ti,syscon-efuse" property passes the reference to the System
> > > >>>>> Controller node as well as the offset to the CTRLMMR_MAC_IDx registers
> > > >>>>> within the CTRL_MMR space.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Please reference upstream DTS or lore link to patch under review.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> An example of the existing implementation in the device-tree for AM64x
> > > >>> is:
> > > >>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/d4e8c8ad5d14ad51ed8813442d81c43019fd669d/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am64-main.dtsi#L697
> > > >>> It uses:
> > > >>> ti,syscon-efuse = <&main_conf 0x200>;
> > > >>>
> > > >>> and "main_conf" node is defined at:
> > > >>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/d4e8c8ad5d14ad51ed8813442d81c43019fd669d/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am64-main.dtsi#L40
> > > >>
> > > >> It is quite different than your bindings, so your bindings are incorrect.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry I didn't understand what you mean. The references I have provided
> > > > are for existing DTS where "main_conf"/"wkup_conf" (System Controller
> > > > nodes) have the compatible "syscon", unlike in AM62p at:
> > > > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/20f8173afaac90dd9dca11be4aa602a47776077f/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62p-wakeup.dtsi#L8
> > > > which has the "simple-bus" compatible for the "wkup_conf" node.
> > > >
> > > > Also, shouldn't the device-tree bindings patches be posted first and get
> > > > merged before I post the device-tree patches that utilize the
> > > > compatible/properties that have been added in the bindings? That is the
> > > > reason why I had shared the "DIFF" for the DTS changes that I will be
> > > > posting once this patch for the new compatible is accepted.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's not the process. I will be NAKing bindings which do not have any
> > > users, because I do not trust you test them.
> > >
> > > The process is almost always:
> > > 1. Send bindings,
> > > 2. Send driver changes (if applicable) in the same patchset.
> > > 3. Send DTS, usually in separate patches and provide lore link to the
> > > bindings in the changelog or cover letter.
> >
> > Thank you for clarifying. I will post the DTS patches corresponding to
> > this patch and reference this patch in the DTS patch series.
>
> I have posted the DTS patch at:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/20240404081845.622707-1-s-vadapalli@xxxxxx/
> indicating the dependency on this bindings patch.
Hello Krzysztof,
Do I have to post a v2 for this patch? You had Acked it initially but I
am not sure if the discussion so far will make it unclear to readers
regarding the acceptance of this patch. Thank you for Acking the v3 DTS
patch at:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/20240404124614.891416-1-s-vadapalli@xxxxxx/
Since the v3 DTS patch mentions this bindings patch as a dependency, I
wanted to be sure whether I have to post a v2 for this or that won't be
required.
Regards,
Siddharth.
