On Wed 30 Jun 15:08 CDT 2021, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> On 2021-06-29 00:35, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 01:17:38AM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> > > Update MSS node to support MSA based modem boot on SC7280 SoCs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts | 7 +++++++
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
> > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> > > index 191e8a92d153..d66e3ca42ad5 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> > > @@ -343,3 +343,10 @@
> > > bias-pull-up;
> > > };
> > > };
> > > +
> > > +&remoteproc_mpss {
> > > + status = "okay";
> > > + compatible = "qcom,sc7280-mss-pil";
> > > + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x124 0x0>, <&apps_smmu 0x488 0x7>;
> > > + memory-region = <&mba_mem &mpss_mem>;
> > > +};
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > index 56ea172f641f..6d3687744440 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > @@ -586,7 +586,8 @@
> > >
> > > remoteproc_mpss: remoteproc@4080000 {
> > > compatible = "qcom,sc7280-mpss-pas";
> > > - reg = <0 0x04080000 0 0x10000>;
> > > + reg = <0 0x04080000 0 0x10000>, <0 0x04180000 0 0x48>;
> > > + reg-names = "qdsp6", "rmb";
> >
> > Binding needs update?
> >
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,adsp.yaml:
> >
> > reg:
> > maxItems: 1
> >
> > >
> > > interrupts-extended = <&intc GIC_SPI 264 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> > > <&modem_smp2p_in 0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> > > @@ -597,8 +598,11 @@
> > > interrupt-names = "wdog", "fatal", "ready", "handover",
> > > "stop-ack", "shutdown-ack";
> > >
> > > - clocks = <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
> > > - clock-names = "xo";
> > > + clocks = <&gcc GCC_MSS_CFG_AHB_CLK>,
> > > + <&gcc GCC_MSS_OFFLINE_AXI_CLK>,
> > > + <&gcc GCC_MSS_SNOC_AXI_CLK>,
> > > + <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
> > > + clock-names = "iface", "offline", "snoc_axi", "xo";
> >
> > Binding needs update?
> >
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,adsp.yaml:
> >
> > clocks:
> > items:
> > - description: XO clock
> > clock-names:
> > items:
> > - const: xo
>
> qcom,sc7280-mpss-pas compatible requires
> just the xo clock and one reg space whereas
> the qcom,sc7280-mss-pil compatible requires
> the additional clks and reg spaces. We just
> overload properties where re-use is possible
> across boards. Hence it would be wrong to
> list those clks/reg spaces as requirements
> for the pas compatible.
>
Our decision to describe the platform node as a superset of the
resources needed by the pas and pil variants was never reflected in the
DT bindings; resulting in the issue that the superset doesn't validate
against the pas binding and both bindings are full of platform-specific
conditionals.
To resolve the two issues I think we should split the current binding(s)
in a set of platform-centric bindings, that captures the idea of
describing the superset.
To reduce the duplication - that already exists between the two
bindings - I think we should break those out in a common part.
I'm however fine with not delaying this series further, if we agree that
the end result matches what we would put in a combined qcom,sc7280-mpss
binding.
Regards,
Bjorn
