On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 01:30:10PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 09:52:48AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Kaneko-san,
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 11:35 PM Yoshihiro Kaneko <ykaneko0929@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > From: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > This patch adds I2C-DVFS device node for the R8A77990 SoC.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Kaneko <ykaneko0929@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Thanks for your patch!
> >
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990.dtsi
> > > @@ -22,7 +22,8 @@
> > > i2c4 = &i2c4;
> > > i2c5 = &i2c5;
> > > i2c6 = &i2c6;
> > > - i2c7 = &i2c7;
> > > + i2c7 = &i2c_dvfs;
> > > + i2c8 = &i2c7;
> >
> > Please don't change existing aliases.
> > While this makes the use of i2c7 for PMIC access uniform across the
> > range of R-Car Gen3 SoCs that have it, I think this is a bad idea, and that
> > it is better not to rely on I2C aliases at all.
> >
> > I guess the BSP did this to configure the BD9571 PMIC for DDR backup
> > mode using i2cset? Upstream has another method, avoiding the need for
> > i2cset, cfr. Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-driver-bd9571mwv-regulator.
>
> Dropping the above hung makes sense to me.
>
> Out of interest, what would be the implication of removing
> existing aliases?
>
> >
> > > };
> > >
> > > cpus {
> > > @@ -337,6 +338,22 @@
> > > reg = <0 0xe6060000 0 0x508>;
> > > };
> > >
> > > + i2c_dvfs: i2c@e60b0000 {
> > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > + compatible = "renesas,iic-r8a77990",
> >
> > "renesas,iic-r8a77990" is not yet documented.
>
> Thanks, as per my comment below I wonder if as well as documenting
> "renesas,iic-r8a77990" we also to teach the driver about it.
>
> >
> > > + "renesas,rcar-gen3-iic",
> > > + "renesas,rmobile-iic";
> >
> > Also, IIC on R-Car E3 does not have the automatic transmission registers.
> > Does this affect claiming compatibility with the family-specific or generic
> > compatible values?
>
> My cursory reading of the driver indicates that only register that is
> used by it but documented as not existing on E3 is ICSTART (offset 0x70).
>
> It seems to me that we should confirm with Renesas that the register does
> indeed not exist - as this patch comes from the BSP which implies it is
> being used there. And if it does not exist we should try teaching the
> driver not to use ICSTART via the "renesas,iic-r8a77990" compat string.
> What do you think?
Further examination by Wolfram Sang has shown that the code in question is
only used on the r8a7740. I don't think there is any compatibility issue
for r8a77990 when using the current driver.
>
>
> > > + reg = <0 0xe60b0000 0 0x34>;
> >
> > Why 0x34? Last (byte-sized) register documented is at 0x14 => 0x15?
>
> I can't explain 0x34 but I agree 0x15 would match the documentation.
>
> >
> > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 173 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 926>;
> > > + power-domains = <&sysc R8A77990_PD_ALWAYS_ON>;
> > > + resets = <&cpg 926>;
> > > + dmas = <&dmac0 0x11>, <&dmac0 0x10>;
> > > + dma-names = "tx", "rx";
> > > + status = "disabled";
> > > + };
> > > +
>
