On 25/08/2024 05:34, 郑豪威 wrote: > > 在 2024/8/12 16:25, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道: >> On 12/08/2024 10:09, 郑豪威 wrote: >>> 在 2024/8/9 18:05, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道: >>>> On 09/08/2024 11:55, 郑豪威 wrote: >>>>>>>>> + description: Enables fractional-N division. Currently, >>>>>>>>> + only LS2K1500 and LS2K2000 support this feature. >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + rts-invert: >>>>>>>>> + description: Inverts the RTS value in the MCR register. >>>>>>>>> + This should be used on Loongson-3 series CPUs, Loongson-2K >>>>>>>>> + series CPUs, and Loongson LS7A bridge chips. >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + dtr-invert: >>>>>>>>> + description: Inverts the DTR value in the MCR register. >>>>>>>>> + This should be used on Loongson-3 series CPUs, Loongson-2K >>>>>>>>> + series CPUs, and Loongson LS7A bridge chips. >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + cts-invert: >>>>>>>>> + description: Inverts the CTS value in the MSR register. >>>>>>>>> + This should be used on Loongson-2K0500, Loongson-2K1000, >>>>>>>>> + and Loongson LS7A bridge chips. >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + dsr-invert: >>>>>>>>> + description: Inverts the DSR value in the MSR register. >>>>>>>>> + This should be used on Loongson-2K0500, Loongson-2K1000, >>>>>>>>> + and Loongson LS7A bridge chips. >>>>>> Same questions for all these. Why choosing invert is a board level >>>>>> decision? If it "should be used" then why it is not used always? >>>>>> >>>>> Because these features are not applicable to all chips, such as >>>>> 'fractional-division', >>>> Hm? >>>> >>>>> which is currently supported only by 2K1500 and 2K2000, and for >>>>> Loongson-3 series >>>> These are SoCs. Compatible defines that. Please align with your >>>> colleagues, because *we talked about this* already. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Krzysztof >>> I consulted with my colleagues and would like to confirm with you. For >>> the five >>> >>> properties provided, fractional-division is offered as a new feature, >>> supported by >>> >>> 2K1500 and 2K2000. As for the invert property, it is due to a bug in our >>> controller, >>> >>> and its usage may vary across different chips. Should we add different >>> compatible >>> >>> values to address these issues for different chips, whether they are new >>> features or >>> >>> controller bugs? >> How did you align? We had already talks with you about this problem - >> you need specific compatibles. How you explain above properties, all of >> them are deducible from the compatible, so drop them. >> >> Your entire argument above does not address at all my concerns, so >> before you respond repeating the same, really talk with your colleagues. >> >> One of many previous discussions: >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/25c30964-6bd3-c7eb-640a-ba1f513b7675@xxxxxxxxxx/ >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20230526-dolly-reheat-06c4d5658415@wendy/ >> >> I wish we do not have to keep repeating the same to Loongson. Please >> STORE the feedback for any future submissions, so you will not repeat >> the same mistakes over and over. >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > Hi: > > I have been aligning with my colleagues over the past few days and > > reviewing previous discussions. Based on these, I have made the > > following modifications according to the differences in the controller: > > +properties: > + compatible: > + oneOf: > + - enum: > + - loongson,ls7a-uart > + - loongson,ls3a5000-uart > + - loongson,ls2k2000-uart > + - items: > + - enum: > + - loongson,ls2k1000-uart > + - loongson,ls2k0500-uart > + - const: loongson,ls7a-uart > + - items: > + - enum: > + - loongson,ls2k1500-uart > + - const: loongson,ls2k2000-uart > + - items: > + - enum: > + - loongson,ls3a6000-uart > + - const: loongson,ls3a5000-uart > + > + reg: > + maxItems: 1 > + > + interrupts: > + maxItems: 1 > + > + clock-frequency: true > + > +required: > + - compatible > + - reg > + - interrupts > + - clock-frequency > + > +allOf: > + - $ref: serial.yaml > + > +unevaluatedProperties: false > + > +examples: > + - | > + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h> > + #include <dt-bindings/clock/loongson,ls2k-clk.h> > + > + serial@1fe20000 { > + compatible = "loongson,ls2k1000-uart", "loongson,ls7a-uart"; > + reg = <0x1fe20000 0x10>; > + clock-frequency = <125000000>; > + interrupt-parent = <&liointc0>; > + interrupts = <0x0 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > + }; > > Does this modification meet the expectation? Yes, assuming ls7a is a specific SoC, not a family of SoC. Best regards, Krzysztof
