[PATCH v8 4/9] mfd: Add binding document for NVIDIA Tegra XUSB
From: Andrew Bresticker <hidden>
Date: 2015-05-14 17:38:34
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-tegra, lkml
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Lee Jones [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015, Jon Hunter wrote:quoted
Hi Lee, On 13/05/15 15:39, Lee Jones wrote:quoted
On Mon, 04 May 2015, Andrew Bresticker wrote:quoted
Add a binding document for the XUSB host complex on NVIDIA Tegra124 and later SoCs. The XUSB host complex includes a mailbox for communication with the XUSB micro-controller and an xHCI host-controller. Signed-off-by: Andrew Bresticker <redacted> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> Cc: Pawel Moll <redacted> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: Ian Campbell <redacted> Cc: Kumar Gala <redacted> Cc: Samuel Ortiz <redacted> Cc: Lee Jones <redacted> --- Changes from v7: - Move non-shared resources into child nodes. New for v7. --- .../bindings/mfd/nvidia,tegra124-xusb.txt | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/nvidia,tegra124-xusb.txtdiff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/nvidia,tegra124-xusb.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/nvidia,tegra124-xusb.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bc50110 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/nvidia,tegra124-xusb.txt@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +NVIDIA Tegra XUSB host copmlex +============================== + +The XUSB host complex on Tegra124 and later SoCs contains an xHCI host +controller and a mailbox for communication with the XUSB micro-controller. + +Required properties: +-------------------- + - compatible: For Tegra124, must contain "nvidia,tegra124-xusb". + Otherwise, must contain '"nvidia,<chip>-xusb", "nvidia,tegra124-xusb"' + where <chip> is tegra132. + - reg: Must contain the base and length of the XUSB FPCI registers. + - ranges: Bus address mapping for the XUSB block. Can be empty since the + mapping is 1:1. + - #address-cells: Must be 2. + - #size-cells: Must be 2. + +Example: +-------- + usb at 0,70098000 { + compatible = "nvidia,tegra124-xusb"; + reg = <0x0 0x70098000 0x0 0x1000>; + ranges; + + #address-cells = <2>; + #size-cells = <2>; + + usb-host at 0,70090000 { + compatible = "nvidia,tegra124-xhci"; + ... + }; + + mailbox { + compatible = "nvidia,tegra124-xusb-mbox"; + ... + };This doesn't appear to be a proper MFD. I would have the USB and Mailbox devices probe seperately and use a phandle to point the USB device to its Mailbox. usb at xyz { mboxes = <&xusb-mailbox, [chan]>; };I am assuming that Andrew had laid it out like this to reflect the hw structure. The mailbox and xhci controller are part of the xusb sub-system and hence appear as child nodes. My understanding is that for device-tree we want the device-tree structure to reflect the actual hw. Is this not the case?Yes, the DT files should reflect h/w. I have requested to see what the memory map looks like, so I might provide a more appropriate solution to accepting a pretty pointless MFD.
FWIW, the address map for XUSB looks like this:
XUSB_HOST: 0x70090000 - 0x7009a000
xHCI registers: 0x70090000 - 0x70098000
FPCI configuration registers: 0x70098000 - 0x70099000
IPFS configuration registers: 0x70099000 - 0x7009a000
Two solutions spring to mind. You can either call
of_platform_populate() from the USB driver, as some already do:
drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c:
ret = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, dev);
drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-keystone.c:
error = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, dev);
drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-omap.c:
ret = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, dev);
drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-qcom.c:
ret = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, qdwc->dev);
drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-st.c:
ret = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, dev);
drivers/usb/musb/musb_am335x.c:
ret = of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);This still requires a small, separate driver to setup the regmap and do of_platform_populate(). The only difference is it lives in drivers/usb/ instead of drivers/mfd/.
Or use the "simple-mfd", which is currently in -next: git show next/master:Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd.txt
I'm not too opposed to this, but Thierry was when I brought this up before. The issue here is that if we ever have to do something besides setting up a regmap in the MFD, we'd have to change the binding and break DT backwards-compatibility. Thanks, Andrew