On 12/13/2024 8:35 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 9.12.2024 3:01 AM, Jie Gan wrote:
On 12/8/2024 12:28 AM, Aiqun Yu (Maria) wrote:
On 12/5/2024 4:44 PM, Jie Gan wrote:
Add following coresight components for QCS8300 platform.
It includes CTI, dummy sink, dynamic Funnel, Replicator, STM,
TPDM, TPDA and TMC ETF.
Signed-off-by: Jie Gan <quic_jiegan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in V2:
1. Rebased on tag next-20241204.
2. Padding the register address to 8 bits.
Link to V1 - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20240929-add_coresight_devices_for_qcs8300-v1-1-4f14e8cb8955@xxxxxxxxxxx/
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs8300.dtsi | 2150 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 2150 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs8300.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs8300.dtsi
index 73abf2ef9c9f..eaec674950d8 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs8300.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs8300.dtsi
@@ -293,6 +293,18 @@ system_sleep: domain-sleep {
};
};
+ dummy_eud: dummy-sink {
+ compatible = "arm,coresight-dummy-sink";
+
+ in-ports {
+ port {
+ eud_in: endpoint {
+ remote-endpoint = <&swao_rep_out1>;
+ };
+ };
+ };
+ };
+
[...]
+
+ tpdm@482c000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,coresight-tpdm", "arm,primecell";
+ reg = <0x0 0x0482c000 0x0 0x1000>;
+
+ clocks = <&aoss_qmp>;
+ clock-names = "apb_pclk";
+
+ qcom,dsb-element-bits = <32>;
+ qcom,dsb-msrs-num = <32>;
+ status = "disabled";
Could you please provide more detailed information on why some TPDM
nodes are disabled by default while others are not?
Some of TPDM nodes are disabled by default because the one of the following reasons:
1. TPDM device are designed to generate HW events, it needs a clock source to read&write its registers. Coresight driver cannot control the clock source ouside AP core, so those TPDM devices without enabled clock source will crash device in probe.
2. Some of TPDM devices can't bootup with fused devices.
3. Some of TPDM devices have known hardware issues that not resolved.
I put those disabled TPDM devices in DT in case some of them may be "fixed" in future.
Please mark them as
/* Hardware issues */
status = "fail";
Maybe I should remove these devices, to avoid confusion. Is that ok?
Konrad
Thanks,
Jie
