diff mbox series

[8/8] ARM: dts: imx7d: add node for PXP

Message ID 20230105134729.59542-9-m.tretter@pengutronix.de (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series media: imx-pxp: add support for i.MX7D | expand

Commit Message

Michael Tretter Jan. 5, 2023, 1:47 p.m. UTC
The i.MX7d contains a Pixel Pipeline in version 3.0. Add the device tree
node to make it available.

Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

Comments

Laurent Pinchart Jan. 6, 2023, 12:36 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi Michael,

Thank you for the patch.

On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 02:47:29PM +0100, Michael Tretter wrote:
> The i.MX7d contains a Pixel Pipeline in version 3.0. Add the device tree
> node to make it available.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> index 7ceb7c09f7ad..728cc9413a7c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> @@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ pcie_phy: pcie-phy@306d0000 {
>  		  reg = <0x306d0000 0x10000>;
>  		  status = "disabled";
>  	};
> +
> +	pxp: pxp@30700000 {
> +		compatible = "fsl,imx7d-pxp";

Hmmm... The i.MX7S also has a PXP that seems compatible. I thus wonder
if we shouldn't move this node to imx7s.dtsi.

> +		reg = <0x30700000 0x10000>;
> +		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> +			<GIC_SPI 46 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;

Nitpicking, alignment ?

> +		clocks = <&clks IMX7D_PXP_CLK>;
> +		clock-names = "axi";
> +	};
>  };
>  
>  &aips3 {
Michael Tretter Jan. 6, 2023, 2:36 p.m. UTC | #2
On Fri, 06 Jan 2023 14:36:41 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> 
> Thank you for the patch.
> 
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 02:47:29PM +0100, Michael Tretter wrote:
> > The i.MX7d contains a Pixel Pipeline in version 3.0. Add the device tree
> > node to make it available.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi | 9 +++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> > index 7ceb7c09f7ad..728cc9413a7c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> > @@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ pcie_phy: pcie-phy@306d0000 {
> >  		  reg = <0x306d0000 0x10000>;
> >  		  status = "disabled";
> >  	};
> > +
> > +	pxp: pxp@30700000 {
> > +		compatible = "fsl,imx7d-pxp";
> 
> Hmmm... The i.MX7S also has a PXP that seems compatible. I thus wonder
> if we shouldn't move this node to imx7s.dtsi.

The i.MX7S has a PXP at the same address, but the architecture in the
reference manual (Figure 13-71. PXP Architecture, p. 3797) looks slightly
different wrt. the location of the multiplexers. The reference manual is also
conspicuously lacking documentation of the DATA_PATH_CTRL0 register.

I wouldn't risk adding the node to the imx7s.dtsi and would rather keep the
option to add a different compatible for the i.MX7S to be able to handle the
difference.

Michael

> 
> > +		reg = <0x30700000 0x10000>;
> > +		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > +			<GIC_SPI 46 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> 
> Nitpicking, alignment ?
> 
> > +		clocks = <&clks IMX7D_PXP_CLK>;
> > +		clock-names = "axi";
> > +	};
> >  };
> >  
> >  &aips3 {
Laurent Pinchart Jan. 6, 2023, 6:43 p.m. UTC | #3
On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 03:36:21PM +0100, Michael Tretter wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jan 2023 14:36:41 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> > 
> > Thank you for the patch.
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 02:47:29PM +0100, Michael Tretter wrote:
> > > The i.MX7d contains a Pixel Pipeline in version 3.0. Add the device tree
> > > node to make it available.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Michael Tretter <m.tretter@pengutronix.de>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi | 9 +++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> > > index 7ceb7c09f7ad..728cc9413a7c 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
> > > @@ -165,6 +165,15 @@ pcie_phy: pcie-phy@306d0000 {
> > >  		  reg = <0x306d0000 0x10000>;
> > >  		  status = "disabled";
> > >  	};
> > > +
> > > +	pxp: pxp@30700000 {
> > > +		compatible = "fsl,imx7d-pxp";
> > 
> > Hmmm... The i.MX7S also has a PXP that seems compatible. I thus wonder
> > if we shouldn't move this node to imx7s.dtsi.
> 
> The i.MX7S has a PXP at the same address, but the architecture in the
> reference manual (Figure 13-71. PXP Architecture, p. 3797) looks slightly
> different wrt. the location of the multiplexers. The reference manual is also
> conspicuously lacking documentation of the DATA_PATH_CTRL0 register.
> 
> I wouldn't risk adding the node to the imx7s.dtsi and would rather keep the
> option to add a different compatible for the i.MX7S to be able to handle the
> difference.

OK, fine with me.

> > > +		reg = <0x30700000 0x10000>;
> > > +		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > > +			<GIC_SPI 46 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > 
> > Nitpicking, alignment ?
> > 
> > > +		clocks = <&clks IMX7D_PXP_CLK>;
> > > +		clock-names = "axi";
> > > +	};
> > >  };
> > >  
> > >  &aips3 {
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
index 7ceb7c09f7ad..728cc9413a7c 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7d.dtsi
@@ -165,6 +165,15 @@  pcie_phy: pcie-phy@306d0000 {
 		  reg = <0x306d0000 0x10000>;
 		  status = "disabled";
 	};
+
+	pxp: pxp@30700000 {
+		compatible = "fsl,imx7d-pxp";
+		reg = <0x30700000 0x10000>;
+		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+			<GIC_SPI 46 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+		clocks = <&clks IMX7D_PXP_CLK>;
+		clock-names = "axi";
+	};
 };
 
 &aips3 {