Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add minimal dts/dtsi files for sdm845 SoC and MTP
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Date: 2018-02-06 20:26:51
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-arm-msm, lkml
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] wrote:
On 01/25, Rajendra Nayak wrote:quoted
create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-mtp.dts create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-mtp.dtsiDo we really need two files? Maybe collapse the two?quoted
create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsidiff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..a21f4912b3e2 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi@@ -0,0 +1,308 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +/* + * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved. + */ + +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h> + +/ { + model = "Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. SDM845"; + + interrupt-parent = <&intc>; + + #address-cells = <2>; + #size-cells = <2>; + + chosen { }; + + memory { + device_type = "memory"; + /* We expect the bootloader to fill in the reg */ + reg = <0 0 0 0>; + }; + + cpus { + #address-cells = <2>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + CPU0: cpu@0 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x0>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_0>; + L2_0: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + L3_0: l3-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + }; + }; + }; + + CPU1: cpu@100 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x100>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_100>; + L2_100: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + CPU2: cpu@200 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x200>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_200>; + L2_200: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + CPU3: cpu@300 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x300>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_300>; + L2_300: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + CPU4: cpu@400 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x400>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_400>; + L2_400: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + CPU5: cpu@500 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x500>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_500>; + L2_500: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + CPU6: cpu@600 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x600>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_600>; + L2_600: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + CPU7: cpu@700 { + device_type = "cpu"; + compatible = "qcom,kryo"; + reg = <0x0 0x700>; + enable-method = "psci"; + next-level-cache = <&L2_700>; + L2_700: l2-cache { + compatible = "cache"; + next-level-cache = <&L3_0>; + }; + }; + + cpu-map { + cluster0 { + core0 { + cpu = <&CPU0>; + }; + + core1 { + cpu = <&CPU1>; + }; + + core2 { + cpu = <&CPU2>; + }; + + core3 { + cpu = <&CPU3>; + }; + }; + + cluster1 { + core0 { + cpu = <&CPU4>; + }; + + core1 { + cpu = <&CPU5>; + }; + + core2 { + cpu = <&CPU6>; + }; + + core3 { + cpu = <&CPU7>; + }; + }; + };From what I recall, this layout causes the kernel to spew warnings? I mean to say this is the power/performance view, but not the architectural view.quoted
+ }; + + timer { + compatible = "arm,armv8-timer"; + interrupts = <GIC_PPI 1 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,Are we supposed to use the GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE macros still?quoted
+ <GIC_PPI 2 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>, + <GIC_PPI 3 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>, + <GIC_PPI 0 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>; + }; + + clocks { + xo_board: xo_board { + compatible = "fixed-clock"; + #clock-cells = <0>; + clock-frequency = <19200000>; + clock-output-names = "xo_board";We can drop clock-output-names on these.quoted
+ }; + + sleep_clk: sleep_clk { + compatible = "fixed-clock"; + #clock-cells = <0>; + clock-frequency = <32764>; + clock-output-names = "sleep_clk"; + }; + }; + + psci { + compatible = "arm,psci-1.0"; + method = "smc"; + }; + + soc: soc {Will anyone use this phandle?quoted
+ #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + ranges = <0 0 0 0xffffffff>; + compatible = "simple-bus"; + + intc: interrupt-controller@17a00000 { + compatible = "arm,gic-v3"; + #interrupt-cells = <3>; + interrupt-controller; + #redistributor-regions = <1>; + redistributor-stride = <0x0 0x20000>; + reg = <0x17a00000 0x10000>, /* GICD */ + <0x17a60000 0x100000>; /* GICR * 8 */ + interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;Can you also add the ITS node please and mark it as disabled? I'll send a patch to the list to skip status = "disabled" ones. We may want to support ITS on these SoCs if the firmware is different.quoted
+ }; + + gcc: clock-controller@100000 { + compatible = "qcom,gcc-sdm845"; + reg = <0x100000 0x1f0000>; + #clock-cells = <1>; + #reset-cells = <1>; + }; + + tlmm: pinctrl@03400000 {Drop leading zeroes please.
Build dtbs with W=2 and fix the warnings so reviewers don't have to waste their time on these issues. Rob