diff mbox

[RFC,5/6] arm64: dts: ti: Add Support for AM654 SoC

Message ID 20180607233853.p7iw7nlxxuyi66og@kahuna (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Nishanth Menon June 7, 2018, 11:38 p.m. UTC
On 14:05-20180605, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:05 AM, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> wrote:
[...]

> > +       soc0: soc0 {
> > +               compatible = "simple-bus";
> > +               #address-cells = <2>;
> > +               #size-cells = <2>;
> > +               ranges;
> 
> Really need 64-bit addresses and sizes? Use ranges to limit the
> address space if possible.

Done -> overall the addresses are really in the 64bit addresses, but
used bus segments and ranges to reduce to 32bit maps where possible.

OSPI, PCIE, FSS (Flash subsystem) , CPTS are some of the ones that
probably will need some level of cleanups when those are introduced
later.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of interleaved addressing between bus
segments themselves, I have tried to keep the ranges as clean as
reasonably possible. I also tried to use 1-1 map for children nodes to
maintain some level of sanity as we add more device nodes. There might
be a few exceptions, but overall the ranges currently map 1-1 physical
32bit address - OSPI, CPTS, FSS will however have to have a different
mapping.

See [1]
> 
> > +
> > +               a53_timer0: timer-cl0-cpu0 {
> > +                       compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
> > +                       interrupts = <GIC_PPI 13 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>, /* cntpsirq */
> > +                                    <GIC_PPI 14 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>, /* cntpnsirq */
> > +                                    <GIC_PPI 11 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>, /* cntvirq */
> > +                                    <GIC_PPI 10 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; /* cnthpirq */
> > +               };
> > +
> > +               pmu: pmu {
> > +                       compatible = "arm,armv8-pmuv3";
> > +                       /* Recommendation from GIC500 TRM Table A.3 */
> > +                       interrupts = <GIC_PPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > +               };
> 
> These 2 nodes aren't on the bus, so move them up a level.

Thanks. oversight on my end. I have fixed it (see [1])
> 
> > +
> > +               gic: interrupt-controller@1800000 {
> > +                       compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
> 
> gic-500?

Yes, GIC500.

> 
> > +                       #address-cells = <2>;
> > +                       #size-cells = <2>;
> > +                       ranges;
> > +                       #interrupt-cells = <3>;
> > +                       interrupt-controller;
> > +                       /*
> > +                        * NOTE: we are NOT gicv2 backward compat, so no GICC,
> > +                        * GICH or GICV
> 
> The compatible should imply this.

GIC500 at SoC design instantiation takes a parameter
"are_option" -> this is set to no-compatibility for V2 for AM6. This is indeed
discovered by the driver, However,
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.txt
just notes that GICC, GICH, GICV as optional.. With backward
compatibility disabled, these are'nt even present.

I have dropped the comment, was helpful for me when I was first
adding support for GIC500, It is pretty common knowledge now for other
ARMV8 developers, so no point in retaining newbie info as comment.

[...]
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..d9b70081daba
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi
> > @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +/*
> > + * Device Tree Source for AM6 SoC family in Quad core configuration
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Texas Instruments Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include "k3-am6.dtsi"
> > +
> > +/ {
> > +       cpus: cpus {
> 
> Really need a label?

Thanks. Dropped.

> 
> > +               #address-cells = <1>;
> > +               #size-cells = <0>;
> > +               cpu-map {
> 
> IIRC, this goes at the top level.

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt
States to keep in cpus node. Quote:

| The ARM CPU topology is defined within the cpu-map node, which is a direct
| child of the cpus node and provides a container where the actual topology
| nodes are listed.

Retained as is to stay in sync with binding.

> > +               cpu0: cpu@0 {
> > +                       compatible = "arm,cortex-a53","arm,armv8";
> 
> space between compatibles.

Oops. Fixed. thanks.

> 
> > +                       reg = <0x000>;
> > +                       device_type = "cpu";
> > +                       enable-method = "psci";
> 
> > +                       i-cache-size = <0x8000>;
> > +                       i-cache-line-size = <64>;
> > +                       i-cache-sets = <256>;
> > +                       d-cache-size = <0x8000>;
> > +                       d-cache-line-size = <64>;
> > +                       d-cache-sets = <128>;
> 
> All this should be discoverable.

Unfortunately no.
Previously CCSIDR_EL1 was a good place to lookup this data.
But as Sudeep pointed me offline:
commit a8d4636f96ad ("arm64: cacheinfo: Remove CCSIDR-based cache information probing")
and commit 9a802431c527 ("arm64: cacheinfo: add support to override cache levels via device tree")
had already provided options to override cache information from the device tree.

This is what I am using.
Quote from commit:
The architecture explicitly states:

| You cannot make any inference about the actual sizes of caches based
| on these parameters.

[...]
> > +
> > +&soc0 {
> > +       L2_0: l2-cache0 {
> > +               compatible = "cache";
> 
> Is this documented?

Just what Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpu-capacity.txt states
as an example. We dont seem to have anything similar to
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/l2c2x0.txt in armv8 as per the
comments in the document at least.

> 
> > +               cache-level = <2>;
> > +               cache-size = <0x80000>;
> > +               cache-line-size = <64>;
> > +               cache-sets = <512>;
> 
> Discoverable?

Same comment as L1 cache details.

> 
> > +               next-level-cache = <&msmc_l3>;
> > +       };
> > +
> > +       L2_1: l2-cache1 {
> > +               compatible = "cache";
> > +               cache-level = <2>;
> > +               cache-size = <0x80000>;
> > +               cache-line-size = <64>;
> > +               cache-sets = <512>;
> > +               next-level-cache = <&msmc_l3>;
> > +       };
> > +
> > +       msmc_l3: l3-cache0 {
> > +               compatible = "cache";
> 
> Is this something TI specific or follows the (ARM) architecture?

ARM Architecture permits an L3 Cache. TI implements it differently (we
dont use CCI), instead an L3 Cache is always active in our
implementation - backing memory is configurable and is designed to be
completely transparent to s/w running on ARMv8.

Description here is to meet the hardware description of cache topology
to be accurate.

[...]
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig
> > index 92770d84a288..be4570baad96 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig
> > @@ -1,3 +1,17 @@
> > +# 64-bit ARM SoCs from TI
> > +if ARM64
> > +
> > +if ARCH_K3
> > +
> > +config ARCH_K3_AM6_SOC
> 
> This should be in another patch (or dropped?).

Agreed and split off into another patch.

[1]
Here is how the patch looks now (after incorporating changes suggested
by Tony as well) - Thoughts please:
https://github.com/nmenon/linux-2.6-playground/tree/upstream/next-20180604/k3-5-defconfig/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti
has everything consolidated.

8<--
From 88857a8241fc67d63021e5c9070092b11398d11f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:12:42 -0500
Subject: [RFC V2 PATCH] arm64: dts: ti: Add Support for AM654 SoC

The AM654 SoC is a lead device of the K3 Multicore SoC architecture
platform, targeted for broad market and industrial control with aim to
meet the complex processing needs of modern embedded products.

Some highlights of this SoC are:
* Quad ARMv8 A53 cores split over two clusters
* GICv3 compliant GIC500
* Configurable L3 Cache and IO-coherent architecture
* Dual lock-step capable R5F uC for safety-critical applications
* High data throughput capable distributed DMA architecture under NAVSS
* Three Gigabit Industrial Communication Subsystems (ICSSG), each with dual
  PRUs and dual RTUs
* Hardware accelerator block containing AES/DES/SHA/MD5 called SA2UL
* Centralized System Controller for Security, Power, and Resource
  management.
* Dual ADCSS, eQEP/eCAP, eHRPWM, dual CAN-FD
* Flash subystem with OSPI and Hyperbus interfaces
* Multimedia capability with CAL, DSS7-UL, SGX544, McASP
* Peripheral connectivity including USB3, PCIE, MMC/SD, GPMC, I2C, SPI,
  GPIO

See AM65x Technical Reference Manual (SPRUID7, April 2018)
for further details: http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/spruid7

We introduce the Kconfig symbol for the SoC along with this patch since
it is logically relevant point, however the usage is in subsequent
patches.

NOTE: AM654 is the first of the device variants, hence we introduce a
generic am6.dtsi.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Fair <b-fair@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
---
 MAINTAINERS                          |   1 +
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am6.dtsi   | 172 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 290 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am6.dtsi
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi

Comments

Tony Lindgren June 14, 2018, 12:38 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi,

Some comments on the ranges below.

* Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> [180607 16:41]:
> +	soc0: soc0 {
> +		compatible = "simple-bus";
> +		#address-cells = <2>;
> +		#size-cells = <2>;
> +		ranges;

I suggest you leave out the soc0, that's not real. Just make
the cbass@0 the top level interconnect. It can then provide
ranges to mcu interconnect which can provide ranges to the wkup
interconnect. So just model it after what's in the hardware :)

I found the following ranges based on a quick look at the TRM,
they could be split further if needed for power domains for
genpd for example.

main covers
0x0000000000 - 0x5402000000

main provides at least the following ranges for mcu
0x0028380000 - 0x002bc00000
0x0040080000 - 0x0041c80000
0x0045100000 - 0x0045180000
0x0045600000 - 0x0045640000
0x0045810000 - 0x0045860000
0x0045950000 - 0x0045950400
0x0045a50000 - 0x0045a50400
0x0045b04000 - 0x0045b06400
0x0045d10000 - 0x0045d24000
0x0046000000 - 0x0060000000
0x0400000000 - 0x0800000000
0x4c3c020000 - 0x4c3c030000
0x4c3e000000 - 0x4c3e040000
0x5400000000 - 0x5402000000

then mcu provides the following ranges for wkup
0x0042000000 - 0x0044410020
0x0045000000 - 0x0045030000
0x0045080000 - 0x00450a0000
0x0045808000 - 0x0045808800
0x0045b00000 - 0x0045b02400

This based on looking at "figure 1-1. device top-level
block diagram" and the memory map in TRM.

Regards,

Tony
Nishanth Menon June 14, 2018, 1:04 p.m. UTC | #2
On 12:38-20180614, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Some comments on the ranges below.

Thanks for reviewing in detail (I understand we are in the middle of
merge window, so thanks for the extra effort).

> 
> * Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> [180607 16:41]:
> > +	soc0: soc0 {
> > +		compatible = "simple-bus";
> > +		#address-cells = <2>;
> > +		#size-cells = <2>;
> > +		ranges;
> 
> I suggest you leave out the soc0, that's not real. Just make

Why is that so, on a more complex board representation with multiple
SoCs, this is a clear node indicating what the main SoC is in the final
dtb representation.

> the cbass@0 the top level interconnect. It can then provide
> ranges to mcu interconnect which can provide ranges to the wkup
> interconnect. So just model it after what's in the hardware :)

That might blow up things quite a bit - it is like the comment in:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/dra7.dtsi#n141

The trees are pretty deep with many interconnections (example main does
have direct connections to wkup as well, which is simplified off in
top level diagram) - basically it is not a direct one dimensional
relationship. But then, the same is the case for other SoCs..

we can represent NAVSS as a bus segment as well.

> 
> I found the following ranges based on a quick look at the TRM,
> they could be split further if needed for power domains for
> genpd for example.

genpd is not really an issue, since it is handled in system firmware and
OSes dont have a visibility into the permitted ranges that the OS is
allowed to use.

I think it is just how accurate a representation is it worth.

> 
> main covers
> 0x0000000000 - 0x5402000000
> 
> main provides at least the following ranges for mcu
> 0x0028380000 - 0x002bc00000
> 0x0040080000 - 0x0041c80000
> 0x0045100000 - 0x0045180000
> 0x0045600000 - 0x0045640000
> 0x0045810000 - 0x0045860000
> 0x0045950000 - 0x0045950400
> 0x0045a50000 - 0x0045a50400
> 0x0045b04000 - 0x0045b06400
> 0x0045d10000 - 0x0045d24000
> 0x0046000000 - 0x0060000000
> 0x0400000000 - 0x0800000000
> 0x4c3c020000 - 0x4c3c030000
> 0x4c3e000000 - 0x4c3e040000
> 0x5400000000 - 0x5402000000
> 
> then mcu provides the following ranges for wkup
> 0x0042000000 - 0x0044410020
> 0x0045000000 - 0x0045030000
> 0x0045080000 - 0x00450a0000
> 0x0045808000 - 0x0045808800
> 0x0045b00000 - 0x0045b02400
> 
> This based on looking at "figure 1-1. device top-level
> block diagram" and the memory map in TRM.

Thanks for researching. I did debate something like:

From A53 view, a more accurate view might be  - from an interconnect
view of the world (still simplified - i have ignored the sub bus
segments in the representations below):

msmc {
	navss_main {
		cbass_main{
			cbass_mcu {
				navss_mcu {
				};
				cbass_wkup{
				};
			};
		};
	};
};

From R5 view, the view will be very different ofcourse:
view of the world (still simplified):

cbass_mcu {
	navss_mcu {
	};
	cbass_wkup{
	};
	cbass_main{
		navss_main {
			msmc {
			};
		};
	};
};


Do we really need this level of representation, I am not sure I had seen
this detailed a representation in other aarch64 SoCs (I am sure they are
as complex as TI SoCs as well).

I am trying to understand the direction and logic why we'd want to have
such a detailed representation.

A more flatter representation of just the main segments allow for dts
reuse between r5 and a53 as well (but that is minor).


Thoughts?
Tony Lindgren June 15, 2018, 5:01 a.m. UTC | #3
* Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> [180614 13:07]:
> On 12:38-20180614, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > Some comments on the ranges below.
> 
> Thanks for reviewing in detail (I understand we are in the middle of
> merge window, so thanks for the extra effort).
> 
> > 
> > * Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> [180607 16:41]:
> > > +	soc0: soc0 {
> > > +		compatible = "simple-bus";
> > > +		#address-cells = <2>;
> > > +		#size-cells = <2>;
> > > +		ranges;
> > 
> > I suggest you leave out the soc0, that's not real. Just make
> 
> Why is that so, on a more complex board representation with multiple
> SoCs, this is a clear node indicating what the main SoC is in the final
> dtb representation.

It does not have a real reg or range.

> > the cbass@0 the top level interconnect. It can then provide
> > ranges to mcu interconnect which can provide ranges to the wkup
> > interconnect. So just model it after what's in the hardware :)
> 
> That might blow up things quite a bit - it is like the comment in:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm/boot/dts/dra7.dtsi#n141

That comment at the link above not true I've found. What we have
there as "ocp" should be just "l3" and then the "l4" instances are
children of "l3". The direct ports from some "l4" devices are just
ranges at the parent "l3". And this will get changed slowly over
next few merge cycles.

> The trees are pretty deep with many interconnections (example main does
> have direct connections to wkup as well, which is simplified off in
> top level diagram) - basically it is not a direct one dimensional
> relationship. But then, the same is the case for other SoCs..

In the above example the connection from main to wkup is just a
range provided by main so not a problem.

> we can represent NAVSS as a bus segment as well.

Well ideally each module on the interconnects would be set up
separately to prevent drivers trying to ioremap ranges from
multiple modules. This is important as flushing posted write to
one module will not flush it for the other module.

> > I found the following ranges based on a quick look at the TRM,
> > they could be split further if needed for power domains for
> > genpd for example.
> 
> genpd is not really an issue, since it is handled in system firmware and
> OSes dont have a visibility into the permitted ranges that the OS is
> allowed to use.

There are other reasons beyond genpd too. Flushing posted writes
to modules is one. Getting rid of pointless deferred probe is
another one. Preventing device drivers trying to ioremap multiple
module is yet another one..

> I think it is just how accurate a representation is it worth.

The dts really is intended to describe the hardware :) So
let's not repeat the same mistake again with imaginary ranges.

> > 
> > main covers
> > 0x0000000000 - 0x5402000000
> > 
> > main provides at least the following ranges for mcu
> > 0x0028380000 - 0x002bc00000
> > 0x0040080000 - 0x0041c80000
> > 0x0045100000 - 0x0045180000
> > 0x0045600000 - 0x0045640000
> > 0x0045810000 - 0x0045860000
> > 0x0045950000 - 0x0045950400
> > 0x0045a50000 - 0x0045a50400
> > 0x0045b04000 - 0x0045b06400
> > 0x0045d10000 - 0x0045d24000
> > 0x0046000000 - 0x0060000000
> > 0x0400000000 - 0x0800000000
> > 0x4c3c020000 - 0x4c3c030000
> > 0x4c3e000000 - 0x4c3e040000
> > 0x5400000000 - 0x5402000000
> > 
> > then mcu provides the following ranges for wkup
> > 0x0042000000 - 0x0044410020
> > 0x0045000000 - 0x0045030000
> > 0x0045080000 - 0x00450a0000
> > 0x0045808000 - 0x0045808800
> > 0x0045b00000 - 0x0045b02400
> > 
> > This based on looking at "figure 1-1. device top-level
> > block diagram" and the memory map in TRM.
> 
> Thanks for researching. I did debate something like:
> 
> From A53 view, a more accurate view might be  - from an interconnect
> view of the world (still simplified - i have ignored the sub bus
> segments in the representations below):
> 
> msmc {
> 	navss_main {
> 		cbass_main{
> 			cbass_mcu {
> 				navss_mcu {
> 				};
> 				cbass_wkup{
> 				};
> 			};
> 		};
> 	};
> };
> 
> From R5 view, the view will be very different ofcourse:
> view of the world (still simplified):
> 
> cbass_mcu {
> 	navss_mcu {
> 	};
> 	cbass_wkup{
> 	};
> 	cbass_main{
> 		navss_main {
> 			msmc {
> 			};
> 		};
> 	};
> };

Well if we follow the hardware representation of the interconnects,
it should not matter from which processor view you're looking at things.
There are just different ranges provided.

> Do we really need this level of representation, I am not sure I had seen
> this detailed a representation in other aarch64 SoCs (I am sure they are
> as complex as TI SoCs as well).

Based on my experience yes. See also the reasons I listed above.

> I am trying to understand the direction and logic why we'd want to have
> such a detailed representation.
> 
> A more flatter representation of just the main segments allow for dts
> reuse between r5 and a53 as well (but that is minor).

Just model it based on the hardware, then there's no need to
debate it or rework it later on :)

Regards,

Tony
Sekhar Nori June 15, 2018, 1:38 p.m. UTC | #4
Hi Tony,

On Friday 15 June 2018 10:31 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> [180614 13:07]:
>> On 12:38-20180614, Tony Lindgren wrote:

>> From A53 view, a more accurate view might be  - from an interconnect
>> view of the world (still simplified - i have ignored the sub bus
>> segments in the representations below):
>>
>> msmc {
>> 	navss_main {
>> 		cbass_main{
>> 			cbass_mcu {
>> 				navss_mcu {
>> 				};
>> 				cbass_wkup{
>> 				};
>> 			};
>> 		};
>> 	};
>> };
>>
>> From R5 view, the view will be very different ofcourse:
>> view of the world (still simplified):
>>
>> cbass_mcu {
>> 	navss_mcu {
>> 	};
>> 	cbass_wkup{
>> 	};
>> 	cbass_main{
>> 		navss_main {
>> 			msmc {
>> 			};
>> 		};
>> 	};
>> };
> 
> Well if we follow the hardware representation of the interconnects,
> it should not matter from which processor view you're looking at things.
> There are just different ranges provided.

AFAIK, the root node needs to have the CPU which is using the DT. So,
the hierarchy will change based on CPU view (if we describe it fully).

How well we can reuse individual interconnect segments is something I
have to think about / experiment. Will have to be wary of any "short
paths" or "cross connections".

Thanks,
Sekhar
Tony Lindgren Aug. 20, 2018, 2:21 p.m. UTC | #5
* Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com> [180615 13:41]:
> 
> How well we can reuse individual interconnect segments is something I
> have to think about / experiment. Will have to be wary of any "short
> paths" or "cross connections".

These short paths and cross connections are almost certainly just
additional ranges from the parent interconnect. See for example
what we have in Linux next for wdt3 in omap4.dtsi for separate
ranges for L4 and L3 interconnects.

Regards,

Tony
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index cfb35b252ac7..5f5c4eddec7a 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -2092,6 +2092,7 @@  M:	Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
 L:	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
 S:	Supported
 F:	Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/ti/k3.txt
+F:	arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-*
 
 ARM/TEXAS INSTRUMENT KEYSTONE ARCHITECTURE
 M:	Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@kernel.org>
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am6.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am6.dtsi
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..700c56eda12d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am6.dtsi
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@ 
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * Device Tree Source for AM6 SoC Family
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Texas Instruments Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/
+ */
+
+#include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
+
+/ {
+	model = "Texas Instruments K3 AM654 SoC";
+	compatible = "ti,am654";
+	interrupt-parent = <&gic500>;
+	#address-cells = <2>;
+	#size-cells = <2>;
+
+	aliases {
+		serial0 = &wkup_uart0;
+		serial1 = &mcu_uart0;
+		serial2 = &main_uart0;
+		serial3 = &main_uart1;
+		serial4 = &main_uart2;
+	};
+
+	chosen { };
+
+	firmware {
+		optee {
+			compatible = "linaro,optee-tz";
+			method = "smc";
+		};
+
+		psci: psci {
+			compatible = "arm,psci-1.0";
+			method = "smc";
+		};
+	};
+
+	a53_timer0: timer-cl0-cpu0 {
+		compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
+		interrupts = <GIC_PPI 13 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>, /* cntpsirq */
+			     <GIC_PPI 14 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>, /* cntpnsirq */
+			     <GIC_PPI 11 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>, /* cntvirq */
+			     <GIC_PPI 10 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; /* cnthpirq */
+	};
+
+	pmu: pmu {
+		compatible = "arm,armv8-pmuv3";
+		/* Recommendation from GIC500 TRM Table A.3 */
+		interrupts = <GIC_PPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+	};
+
+	soc0: soc0 {
+		compatible = "simple-bus";
+		#address-cells = <2>;
+		#size-cells = <2>;
+		ranges;
+
+		main_domain: cbass@100000 {
+			compatible = "simple-bus";
+			#address-cells = <1>;
+			#size-cells = <1>;
+			ranges = <0x00100000 0x00 0x00100000 0x00020000>, /* ctrl mmr */
+				 <0x00600000 0x00 0x00600000 0x00001100>, /* GPIO */
+				 <0x00900000 0x00 0x00900000 0x00012000>, /* serdes */
+				 <0x01000000 0x00 0x01000000 0x0AF02400>, /* Most peripherals */
+				 <0x30800000 0x00 0x30800000 0x0BC00000>; /* MAIN NAVSS */
+
+			gic500: interrupt-controller@1800000 {
+				compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
+				#address-cells = <1>;
+				#size-cells = <1>;
+				ranges;
+				#interrupt-cells = <3>;
+				interrupt-controller;
+				reg = <0x01800000 0x10000>,	/* GICD */
+				      <0x01880000 0x90000>;	/* GICR */
+
+				/*
+				 * vcpumntirq:
+				 * virtual CPU interface maintenance interrupt
+				 */
+				interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+
+				gic_its: gic-its@18200000 {
+					compatible = "arm,gic-v3-its";
+					reg = <0x01820000 0x10000>;
+					msi-controller;
+					#msi-cells = <1>;
+				};
+			};
+
+			main_uart0: serial@2800000 {
+				compatible = "ti,am654-uart", "ti,omap4-uart", "ns16550a";
+				reg = <0x02800000 0x100>;
+				reg-shift = <2>;
+				reg-io-width = <4>;
+				interrupts = <GIC_SPI 192 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+				clock-frequency = <48000000>;
+				current-speed = <115200>;
+				status = "disabled";
+			};
+
+			main_uart1: serial@2810000 {
+				compatible = "ti,am654-uart", "ti,omap4-uart", "ns16550a";
+				reg = <0x02810000 0x100>;
+				reg-shift = <2>;
+				reg-io-width = <4>;
+				interrupts = <GIC_SPI 193 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+				clock-frequency = <48000000>;
+				current-speed = <115200>;
+				status = "disabled";
+			};
+
+			main_uart2: serial@2820000 {
+				compatible = "ti,am654-uart", "ti,omap4-uart", "ns16550a";
+				reg = <0x02820000 0x100>;
+				reg-shift = <2>;
+				reg-io-width = <4>;
+				interrupts = <GIC_SPI 194 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+				clock-frequency = <48000000>;
+				current-speed = <115200>;
+				status = "disabled";
+			};
+		};
+
+		wkup_domain: cbass@42040000 {
+			compatible = "simple-bus";
+			#address-cells = <1>;
+			#size-cells = <1>;
+			ranges = <0x42040000 0x00 0x42040000 0x03AC2400>; /* Basic peripherals */
+
+			wkup_uart0: serial@42300000 {
+				compatible = "ti,am654-uart", "ti,omap4-uart", "ns16550a";
+				reg = <0x42300000 0x100>;
+				reg-shift = <2>;
+				reg-io-width = <4>;
+				interrupts = <GIC_SPI 697 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+				clock-frequency = <48000000>;
+				current-speed = <115200>;
+				status = "disabled";
+			};
+
+		};
+
+		mcu_domain: cbass@28380000 {
+			compatible = "simple-bus";
+			#address-cells = <1>;
+			#size-cells = <1>;
+			ranges = <0x28380000 0x00 0x28380000 0x03880000>, /* MCU NAVSS*/
+				 <0x40200000 0x00 0x40200000 0x00900100>, /* First peripheral window */
+				 <0x45100000 0x00 0x45100000 0x00c24000>, /* MMRs, remaining NAVSS */
+				 <0x46000000 0x00 0x46000000 0x00200000>, /* CPSW */
+				 <0x47000000 0x00 0x47000000 0x00068400>; /* OSPI space 1 */
+
+			mcu_uart0: serial@40a00000 {
+				compatible = "ti,am654-uart", "ti,omap4-uart", "ns16550a";
+				reg = <0x40a00000 0x100>;
+				reg-shift = <2>;
+				reg-io-width = <4>;
+				interrupts = <GIC_SPI 565 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+				clock-frequency = <96000000>;
+				current-speed = <115200>;
+				status = "disabled";
+			};
+
+		};
+
+	};
+};
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..bffa414180ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654.dtsi
@@ -0,0 +1,117 @@ 
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/*
+ * Device Tree Source for AM6 SoC family in Quad core configuration
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Texas Instruments Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/
+ */
+
+#include "k3-am6.dtsi"
+
+/ {
+	cpus {
+		#address-cells = <1>;
+		#size-cells = <0>;
+		cpu-map {
+			cluster0: cluster0 {
+				core0 {
+					cpu = <&cpu0>;
+				};
+
+				core1 {
+					cpu = <&cpu1>;
+				};
+			};
+
+			cluster1: cluster1 {
+				core0 {
+					cpu = <&cpu2>;
+				};
+
+				core1 {
+					cpu = <&cpu3>;
+				};
+			};
+		};
+
+		cpu0: cpu@0 {
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
+			reg = <0x000>;
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			enable-method = "psci";
+			i-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			i-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			i-cache-sets = <256>;
+			d-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			d-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			d-cache-sets = <128>;
+			next-level-cache = <&L2_0>;
+		};
+
+		cpu1: cpu@1 {
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
+			reg = <0x001>;
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			enable-method = "psci";
+			i-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			i-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			i-cache-sets = <256>;
+			d-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			d-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			d-cache-sets = <128>;
+			next-level-cache = <&L2_0>;
+		};
+
+		cpu2: cpu@100 {
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
+			reg = <0x100>;
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			enable-method = "psci";
+			i-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			i-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			i-cache-sets = <256>;
+			d-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			d-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			d-cache-sets = <128>;
+			next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
+		};
+
+		cpu3: cpu@101 {
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
+			reg = <0x101>;
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			enable-method = "psci";
+			i-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			i-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			i-cache-sets = <256>;
+			d-cache-size = <0x8000>;
+			d-cache-line-size = <64>;
+			d-cache-sets = <128>;
+			next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
+		};
+	};
+};
+
+&soc0 {
+	L2_0: l2-cache0 {
+		compatible = "cache";
+		cache-level = <2>;
+		cache-size = <0x80000>;
+		cache-line-size = <64>;
+		cache-sets = <512>;
+		next-level-cache = <&msmc_l3>;
+	};
+
+	L2_1: l2-cache1 {
+		compatible = "cache";
+		cache-level = <2>;
+		cache-size = <0x80000>;
+		cache-line-size = <64>;
+		cache-sets = <512>;
+		next-level-cache = <&msmc_l3>;
+	};
+
+	msmc_l3: l3-cache0 {
+		compatible = "cache";
+		cache-level = <3>;
+	};
+};