On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 09:06:00AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > Hi Rob, > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Add properties > > for i.MX95 Pinctrl OEM extensions > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 10:53:17AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > i.MX95 Pinctrl is managed by SCMI firmware using OEM extensions. This > > > patch is to add i.MX95 Pinctrl OEM extensions properties. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 9 ++- > > > .../bindings/firmware/nxp,imx95-scmi-pinctrl.yaml | 66 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > .... > > > > + > > > +title: i.MX System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Pinctrl > > > +Protocol > > > + > > > +maintainers: > > > + - Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > + > > > +patternProperties: > > > + '[a-f0-9]+$': > > > + type: object > > > + unevaluatedProperties: false > > > + > > > + properties: > > > + pins: > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string > > > + description: name of the pin > > > + items: > > > + enum: [ daptdi, daptmsswdio, daptclkswclk, daptdotraceswo, > > > + gpioio00, gpioio01, gpioio02, gpioio03, gpioio04, > > > > ioio? > > Yes. The name is exported from SCMI firmware. > > > > > > + gpioio05, gpioio06, gpioio07, gpioio08, gpioio09, > > > + gpioio10, gpioio11, gpioio12, gpioio13, gpioio14, > > > + gpioio15, gpioio16, gpioio17, gpioio18, gpioio19, > > > + gpioio20, gpioio21, gpioio22, gpioio23, gpioio24, > > > + gpioio25, gpioio26, gpioio27, gpioio28, gpioio29, > > > + gpioio30, gpioio31, gpioio32, gpioio33, gpioio34, > > > + gpioio35, gpioio36, gpioio37, ccmclko1, ccmclko2, > > > + ccmclko3, ccmclko4, enet1mdc, enet1mdio, enet1td3, > > > + enet1td2, enet1td1, enet1td0, enet1txctl, enet1txc, > > > + enet1rxctl, enet1rxc, enet1rd0, enet1rd1, enet1rd2, > > > + enet1rd3, enet2mdc, enet2mdio, enet2td3, enet2td2, > > > + enet2td1, enet2td0, enet2txctl, enet2txc, enet2rxctl, > > > + enet2rxc, enet2rd0, enet2rd1, enet2rd2, enet2rd3, > > > + sd1clk, sd1cmd, sd1data0, sd1data1, sd1data2, sd1data3, > > > + sd1data4, sd1data5, sd1data6, sd1data7, sd1strobe, > > > + sd2vselect, sd3clk, sd3cmd, sd3data0, sd3data1, > > > + sd3data2, sd3data3, xspi1data0, xspi1data1, xspi1data2, > > > + xspi1data3, xspi1data4, xspi1data5, xspi1data6, > > > + xspi1data7, xspi1dqs, xspi1sclk, xspi1ss0b, xspi1ss1b, > > > + sd2cdb, sd2clk, sd2cmd, sd2data0, sd2data1, sd2data2, > > > + sd2data3, sd2resetb, i2c1scl, i2c1sda, i2c2scl, i2c2sda, > > > + uart1rxd, uart1txd, uart2rxd, uart2txd, pdmclk, > > > + pdmbitstream0, pdmbitstream1, sai1txfs, sai1txc, > > > + sai1txd0, sai1rxd0, wdogany, fccuerr0 ] > > > + > > > + nxp,func-id: > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 > > > + description: Indicates the PAD connections which function > > > + module > > > > The description makes no sense... > > I will use below description in v3: > For each pin, there are up to 8 muxing options (called ALT modes). For example: > Select 1 of 5 iomux modes to be used for pad: DAP_TCLK_SWCLK. > 000b - Select mux mode: ALT0 mux port: JTAG_MUX_TCK of instance: jtag_mux > 010b - Select mux mode: ALT2 mux port: CAN4_RX of instance: imx95_wakeupmix_top > 100b - Select mux mode: ALT4 mux port: FLEXIO1_FLEXIO30 of instance: imx95_wakeupmix_top > 101b - Select mux mode: ALT5 mux port: GPIO3_IO30 of instance: imx95_wakeupmix_top > 110b - Select mux mode: ALT6 mux port: LPUART5_CTS_B of instance: imx95_wakeupmix_top > The nxp,func-id property is selecting one ALT mode. Looks like constraints on the values. Please add schema for them. I don't think you need to list an example. Perhaps you should be using 'pinmux' property. That is the standard way to specify a numeric mux mode. > > > > > + > > > + nxp,pin-conf: > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 > > > + description: The PAD configuration > > > > PAD stands for? Or is it pin configuration as the property name says? > > It is pin configuration which includes pull up/down, drive strength and etc. > > > > > This is just a raw register values? > > Yes. > > Why can't standard pinctrl properties be > > used here. What's the point of using SCMI pinctrl if you are just shuttling > > register values to SCMI? > > Standard pinctrl properties will need more memory in our SCMI > firmware design. We have limited on-chip memory for SCMI firmware usage. Then maybe you shouldn't be using SCMI and just write a pinctrl driver. Or, Linux has to parse the DT anyways, so use standard properties and transform them into your register values and send that to SCMI. > > > + > > > + nxp,daisy-id: > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 > > > + description: The select input register ID > > > + > > > + nxp,daisy-conf: > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 > > > + description: The select input register value > > > > I remember some daisy chaining stuff in iomuxc, but otherwise > > > > What's the relationship between these 2 properties? Is it valid if only > > 1 is present? I doubt it. > > The scmi firmware will convert the daisy-id into register address, and > write the daisy-conf value into the register. > > Looks like an address and value pair. Either the > > schema needs to define allowed combinations > > The firmware will check whether id and conf is valid, is there a need to define > allowed combinations? There will be lots of check to define allowed > combinations. The firmware can't check that the DT contains nxp,daisy-id but not nxp,daisy-conf or vice-versa. Of course the kernel could check that, but validating the DT is not the kernel's job. > or design the properties in a > > way you don't have too. IOW, make a single property that's a tuple of register > > ID and value. > > Define tuple will make the property not able to use linux generic pinconf > driver. The current parse_dt_cfg for custom_dt_params only support a > single u32 value and not easy to support tuple. Sounds like a Linux problem. We're talking about bindings. Fix Linux if it doesn't meet your needs. How many bits of id and conf do you need? This too could just be part of 'pinmux' property. It's value is entirely h/w specific and up to you. You just need to fit it into 32-bits (though we could perhaps enlarge it). Rob
