Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] arm64: dts: freescale: Add i.MX91 dtsi support
From: Alexander Stein <hidden>
Date: 2025-01-21 08:33:56
Also in:
imx, linux-devicetree, lkml
Am Dienstag, 21. Januar 2025, 08:40:14 CET schrieb Joy Zou:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Pengfei Li <redacted> The i.MX 91 family features an Arm Cortex-A55 running at up to 1.4GHz, support for modern LPDDR4 memory to enable platform longevity, along with a rich set of peripherals targeting medical, industrial and consumer IoT market segments. The design of the i.MX91 platform is very similar to i.MX93. The mainly difference between i.MX91 and i.MX93 is as follows: - i.MX91 removed some clocks and modified the names of some clocks. - i.MX91 only has one A core - i.MX91 has different pinmux Signed-off-by: Pengfei Li <redacted> Signed-off-by: Joy Zou <redacted> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91-pinfunc.h | 770 ++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91.dtsi | 70 ++ 2 files changed, 840 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91-pinfunc.h create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91.dtsi [snip]diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91.dtsi new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..67a5a487ab57 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx91.dtsi@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT) +/* + * Copyright 2024 NXP + */ + +#include "imx91-pinfunc.h" +#include "imx93.dtsi" + +/delete-node/ &A55_1; +/delete-node/ &cm33; +/delete-node/ &mlmix; +/delete-node/ &mu1; +/delete-node/ &mu2; + +&clk { + compatible = "fsl,imx91-ccm"; +}; + +&eqos { + clocks = <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET1_QOS_TSN_GATE>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET1_QOS_TSN_GATE>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET_TIMER>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET1_QOS_TSN>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET1_QOS_TSN_GATE>; + assigned-clocks = <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET_TIMER>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET1_QOS_TSN>; + assigned-clock-parents = <&clk IMX93_CLK_SYS_PLL_PFD1_DIV2>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_SYS_PLL_PFD0_DIV2>; +}; + +&fec { + clocks = <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET2_REGULAR_GATE>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET2_REGULAR_GATE>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET_TIMER>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET2_REGULAR>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_DUMMY>; + assigned-clocks = <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET_TIMER>, + <&clk IMX91_CLK_ENET2_REGULAR>; + assigned-clock-parents = <&clk IMX93_CLK_SYS_PLL_PFD1_DIV2>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_SYS_PLL_PFD0_DIV2>; + assigned-clock-rates = <100000000>, <250000000>; +}; + +&i3c1 { + clocks = <&clk IMX93_CLK_BUS_AON>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_I3C1_GATE>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_DUMMY>; +}; + +&i3c2 { + clocks = <&clk IMX93_CLK_BUS_WAKEUP>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_I3C2_GATE>, + <&clk IMX93_CLK_DUMMY>; +}; + +&iomuxc { + compatible = "fsl,imx91-iomuxc"; +}; + +&tmu { + status = "disabled"; +}; + +&ddr_pmu { + compatible = "fsl,imx91-ddr-pmu", "fsl,imx93-ddr-pmu"; +}; + +&map0 { + cooling-device = <&A55_0 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>; +};
Somehow I don't like it that much. Instead of removing nodes from imx93.dtsi wouldn't it make more sense to include from imx91.dtsi into imx93.dtsi and _add_ nodes with are unique to i.MX93? Otherwise each add to imx93.dtsi requires an remove in imx91.dtsi for this unique to i.MX93, e.g. NPU. Best regards, Alexander -- TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018 Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider http://www.tq-group.com/