On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 11:21 AM Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 11:36 AM > > To: Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xxxxxxxxxx>; Michal Simek > > <michals@xxxxxxxxxx>; michael.auchter@xxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx; Ed T. Mooring <emooring@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux- > > remoteproc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm- > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Jason Wu <j.wu@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jiaying Liang > > <jliang@xxxxxxxxxx>; Michal Simek <michals@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for > > ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 03:39:29PM -0700, Ben Levinsky wrote: > > > Add binding for ZynqMP R5 OpenAMP. > > > > > > Represent the RPU domain resources in one device node. Each RPU > > > processor is a subnode of the top RPU domain node. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wu <j.wu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang <jliang@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > v3: > > > - update zynqmp_r5 yaml parsing to not raise warnings for extra > > > information in children of R5 node. The warning "node has a unit > > > name, but no reg or ranges property" will still be raised though > > > as this particular node is needed to describe the > > > '#address-cells' and '#size-cells' information. > > > v4:: > > > - remove warning '/example-0/rpu@ff9a0000/r5@0: > > > node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property' > > > by adding reg to r5 node. > > > v5: > > > - update device tree sample and yaml parsing to not raise any warnings > > > - description for memory-region in yaml parsing > > > - compatible string in yaml parsing for TCM > > > v6: > > > - remove coupling TCM nodes with remoteproc > > > - remove mailbox as it is optional not needed > > > v7: > > > - change lockstep-mode to xlnx,cluster-mode > > > v9: > > > - show example IPC nodes and tcm bank nodes > > > v11: > > > - add property meta-memory-regions to illustrate link > > > between r5 and TCM banks > > > - update so no warnings from 'make dt_binding_check' > > > v14: > > > - concerns were raised about the new property meta-memory-regions. > > > There is no clear direction so for the moment I kept it in the series > > > - place IPC nodes in RAM in the reserved memory section > > > v15: > > > - change lockstep-mode prop as follows: if present, then RPU cluster is in > > > lockstep mode. if not present, cluster is in split mode. > > > --- > > > .../xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc.yaml | 120 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp- > > r5-remoteproc.yaml > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..ce02e425692e > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > > > +%YAML 1.2 > > > +--- > > > +$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml#" > > > +$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#"; > > > + > > > +title: Xilinx R5 remote processor controller bindings > > > + > > > +description: > > > + This document defines the binding for the remoteproc component that > > loads and > > > + boots firmwares on the Xilinx Zynqmp and Versal family chipset. > > > + > > > + Note that the Linux has global addressing view of the R5-related memory > > (TCM) > > > + so the absolute address ranges are provided in TCM reg's. > > > > blank line needed. > > > will fix in next rev. > > TCMs specifically I'm concerned about how they are represented in system > > DT and here... > > > So System DT can tie in with lopper plugin/assists so that TCMs are output to whatever the linux driver expects. Sorry, I don't buy lopper can handle it. That leaves too much hand waving IMO. > > > +maintainers: > > > + - Ed Mooring <ed.mooring@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > + - Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > + > > > +properties: > > > + compatible: > > > + const: "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0" > > > > Don't need quotes. > > > will fix in next rev. > > The use of version numbers was allowed for Xilinx programmable IP. I > > don't think this falls into that category. > > > will fix in next rev. > > > + > > > + lockstep-mode: > > > + description: > > > + If this property is present, then the configuration is lock-step. > > > > boolean... > > > By this comment do you mean you want this to change or mention that it is implicitly Boolean? You defining this as a boolean and then using a schema that applies to arrays (maxItems). > > > + Otherwise RPU is split. > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > ...or an array? > > > > Either way, doesn't work for TI R5. > > > So as the configuration for both the TI R5 and Xilinx R5 is independent what in common would you like to see here? > For example Xilinx driver can similarly have the "Xilinx,cluster-mode" or "cluster-mode" but for Xilinx platform manager our split configuration value in Xilinx platform manager is '0' while in TI drver it is '1'. So I can make the driver expect it then translate if needed if this what you prefer. What's Xilinx platform manager? The drivers are irrelevant for the binding. > > Otherwise how would you suggest the Xilinx r5 remoteproc driver describe split/lockstep mode? For what's clearly the same functionality, I want the binding the same. TI can have more modes if that's what they need. > > > + > > > + interrupts: > > > + description: > > > + Interrupt mapping for remoteproc IPI. It is required if the > > > + user uses the remoteproc driver with the RPMsg kernel driver. > > > + maxItems: 6 > > > + > > > + memory-region: > > > + description: > > > + collection of memory carveouts used for elf-loading and inter-processor > > > + communication. > > > + maxItems: 4 > > > + minItems: 4 > > > > Need to define what each region is. > > > > One blank line between properties. > > > will fix in next rev. for memory-regions is the following ok? > collection of phandles for memory carveouts for elf-loading and > inter-processor communication. > > This collection can consist of reserved-mem carveouts in DDR. No. items: - description: This is the 1st entry... - description: This is the 2nd entry... ... > > > > + meta-memory-regions: > > > + description: > > > + collection of memories that are not present in the top level memory > > > + nodes' mapping. For example, R5s' TCM banks. These banks are needed > > > + for R5 firmware meta data such as the R5 firmware's heap and stack > > > > Humm, needs a better explanation. > How is the following: > Collection of phandles for reserved on-chip SRAM regions. > > > Otherwise I can get rid of this property and combine into memory-region if you wish. Not sure really. > > > + pnode-id: > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > What's this? > > > Can add the following: > power node id that is used to uniquely identify the RPU for Xilinx > Power Management. The value is then passed to Xilinx platform > manager for power on/off and access. Sounds like you should be using the power-domain binding. > > > + mboxes: > > > + maxItems: 2 > > > > Need to define what each one is. > > > How is the following: > array of phandles that describe the rx and tx for xilinx zynqmp > mailbox driver. order of rx and tx is described by the mbox-names > property. This will be used for communication with remote > processor. > > > + mbox-names: > > > + maxItems: 2 > > > > Need to define the names. > > > How is the following: > array of strings that denote which item in the mboxes property array > are the rx and tx for xilinx zynqmp mailbox driver Terrible. We have a schema to define constraints. items: - const: rx - const: tx > > > + > > > +examples: > > > + - | > > > + reserved-memory { > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + ranges; > > > + elf_load: rproc@3ed000000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed00000 0x40000>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + rpu0vdev0vring0: rpu0vdev0vring0@3ed40000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed40000 0x4000>; > > > + }; > > > + rpu0vdev0vring1: rpu0vdev0vring1@3ed44000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed44000 0x4000>; > > > + }; > > > + rpu0vdev0buffer: rpu0vdev0buffer@3ed48000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed48000 0x100000>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + }; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Below nodes are required if using TCM to load R5 firmware > > > + * if not, then either do not provide nodes are label as disabled in > > > + * status property > > > + */ > > > + tcm0a: tcm_0a@ffe00000 { > > > + reg = <0xffe00000 0x10000>; > > > + pnode-id = <0xf>; > > > + no-map; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > + phandle = <0x40>; > > > + compatible = "xlnx,tcm"; > > > > TCM is a Xilinx specific thing? > > > No... good point. Can remove the compatible string in next rev. Well, it should probably have some sort of compatible so we know what the thing is... If we have a DT for the R5 side or view of the system, we'd need to define TCMs, right? For the A cores, it shouldn't look any different other than perhaps the address. So, you first need a TCM binding. Maybe that ends up being just mmio-sram binding, maybe not. Probably not if there's power controls. > > > + }; > > > + tcm0b: tcm_1a@ffe20000 { > > > + reg = <0xffe20000 0x10000>; > > > + pnode-id = <0x10>; > > > + no-map; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > + compatible = "xlnx,tcm"; > > > + phandle = <0x41>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + rpu { > > > + compatible = "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0"; > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + ranges; > > > + lockstep-mode; > > > + r5_0 { > > > + ranges; > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + memory-region = <&elf_load>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0vring0>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0vring1>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0buffer>; > > > + meta-memory-regions = <&tcm_0a>, <&tcm_0b>; > > > + pnode-id = <0x7>; > > > + }; > > > + }; > > > + > > > +... > > > -- > > > 2.17.1 > > > > Thank you, > Ben > >
