Hello,
On Thu Jan 25, 2024 at 8:51 AM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/01/2024 16:14, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> +
> >> + pinctrl-b {
> >> + compatible = "mobileye,eyeq5-b-pinctrl";
> >> + #pinctrl-cells = <1>;
> >> + };
> >> + };
> >
> > This can all be simplified to:
> >
> > system-controller@e00000 {
> > compatible = "mobileye,eyeq5-olb", "syscon";
> > reg = <0xe00000 0x400>;
> > #reset-cells = <2>;
> > #clock-cells = <1>;
> > clocks = <&xtal>;
> > clock-names = "ref";
> >
> > pins { ... };
> > };
> >
> > There is no need for sub nodes unless you have reusable blocks or each
> > block has its own resources in DT.
>
> Yes, however I believe there should be resources here: each subnode
> should get its address space. This is a bit tied to implementation,
> which currently assumes "everyone can fiddle with everything" in this block.
>
> Theo, can you draw memory map?
It would be a mess. I've counted things up. The first 147 registers are
used in this 0x400 block. There are 31 individual blocks, with 7
registers unused (holes to align next block).
Functions are reset, clocks, LBIST, MBIST, DDR control, GPIO,
accelerator control, CPU entrypoint, PDTrace, IRQs, chip info & ID
stuff, control registers for PCIe / eMMC / Eth / SGMII / DMA / etc.
Some will never get used from Linux, others might. Maybe a moderate
approach would be to create ressources for major blocks and make it
evolve organically, without imposing that all uses lead to a new
ressource creation.
Thanks,
--
Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
