Thank you for your feedback Rob! On Tue, 2025-02-18 at 15:06 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > QUESTION: > > > > I'm unsure about reg properties in the subnodes (child devices) of > > RTCSYS: > > - they will not be used anyway by the drivers because they genuinely > > overlap (the whole point of going MFD) -- therefore the drivers will do > > syscon_node_to_regmap(pdev->dev.parent->of_node) > > - as I understood from the history of MFD dt bindings' submissions, regs > > are encouraged, if can be specified > > - overlapping regs cause dt_binding_check warnings: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.example.dts:34.19-39.15: Warning (unique_unit_address_if_enabled): /example-0/rtcsys@5025000/mcu@0: duplicate unit-address (also used in > > node /example-0/rtcsys@5025000/pmu@0) > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.example.dts:34.19-39.15: Warning (unique_unit_address_if_enabled): /example-0/rtcsys@5025000/mcu@0: duplicate unit-address (also used in > > node /example-0/rtcsys@5025000/rtc@0) > > > > Shall I remove the MMIO resources from the actual devices or rather ignore the warnings? > > Ignore the warnings is not an option. > > Removing makes since if the registers and bitfields are completely mixed > up. If they are, then I find it hard to believe the child nodes are > separate blocks. And if they aren't, then it should all be just 1 node. The HW vendor calls it "RTC". But this "RTC" is also responsible for the whole power sequencing and [chip-wide] power management. And afterwards they've put SRAM controller registers and remoteproc (independent 8051 core) controller into the same address space (interleaved). I have hard times to apply any strict logic here. > You don't have to have child nodes to have separate drivers. But if I don't utilize "simple-mfd" and children nodes, then I'd need some MFD core driver registering the "cells" even though, there will be no other functions in it? On the other hand, maybe this is the way forward if we are unsure as of now, which cells do we want to implement at all as a separate driver and which ones are we going to combine in a single driver?.. > > .../bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.yaml | 222 ++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 222 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.yaml > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.yaml > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..2dc7c2df15c1 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.yaml > > @@ -0,0 +1,222 @@ > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) > > +%YAML 1.2 > > +--- > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mfd/sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys.yaml# > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > + > > +title: Cvitek CV18xx/Sophgo SG200x Real Time Clock module > > + > > +maintainers: > > + - Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@xxxxxxxxx> > > + - sophgo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > + > > +description: > > + The RTC (Real Time Clock) is an independently powered module in the chip. It > > + contains a 32KHz oscillator and a Power-On-Reset (POR) sub-module, which can > > + be used for time display and scheduled alarm produce. In addition, the > > + hardware state machine provides triggering and timing control for chip > > + power-on, power-off and reset. > > + > > + Furthermore, the 8051 subsystem is located within RTCSYS and is independently > > + powered. System software can use the 8051 to manage wake conditions and wake > > + the system while the system is asleep, and communicate with external devices > > + through peripheral controllers. > > + > > + Technical Reference Manual available at > > + https://github.com/sophgo/sophgo-doc/releases/download/sg2000-trm-v1.01/sg2000_trm_en.pdf > > + [...] > > > + "^sram@[0-9a-f]+$": > > + type: object > > + additionalProperties: false > > + > > + description: > > + Provide 2KB of SRAM, which can host software code or temporary data. > > + > > + properties: > > + compatible: > > + items: > > + - enum: > > + - sophgo,cv1800b-rtc-sram > > + > > + reg: > > + maxItems: 1 > > + > > + clocks: > > + maxItems: 1 > > + > > + required: > > + - compatible > > + > > +required: > > + - compatible > > + - reg > > + - "#address-cells" > > + - "#size-cells" > > + - ranges > > + > > +additionalProperties: > > + type: object > > + > > +examples: > > + - | > > + #include <dt-bindings/clock/sophgo,cv1800.h> > > + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h> > > + > > + rtcsys@5025000 { > > + compatible = "sophgo,cv1800b-rtcsys", "simple-mfd", "syscon"; > > + reg = <0x5025000 0x2000>; > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > + ranges = <0 0x5025000 0x2000>; > > + > > + mcu@0 { > > + compatible = "sophgo,cv1800b-rtc-dw8051"; > > + reg = <0x0 0x1000>; > > + clocks = <&clk CLK_SRC_RTC_SYS_0>; > > + sram = <&rtc_sram>; > > + }; > > + > > + pmu@0 { > > + compatible = "sophgo,cv1800b-rtc-pmu"; > > + reg = <0x0 0x2000>; > > + interrupts = <18 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, > > + <19 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > > + interrupt-names = "longpress", "vbat"; > > + }; > > + > > + rtc@0 { > > + compatible = "sophgo,cv1800b-rtc"; > > + reg = <0 0x2000>; > > + interrupts = <17 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > > + interrupt-names = "alarm"; > > + clocks = <&clk CLK_RTC_25M>; > > + }; > > + > > + rtc_sram: sram@0 { > > + compatible = "sophgo,cv1800b-rtc-sram"; > > + reg = <0x0 0x1000>; > > How does the SRAM overlap registers? Those are not SRAM cells mapped into this address space, but rather several control registers controlling reset, power and clock of the SRAM. -- Alexander Sverdlin.
