| Message ID | 20230424173623.477577-4-nm@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200: Fixes for various dtbs_checks warnings | expand |
Hi Nishanth, On 4/24/2023 11:06 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > fss node claims to be entirely a syscon node, but it is really two > parts of it - one a syscon that controls the hbmc mux and a simple bus > where ospi, hbmc peripherals are located. So model it accordingly by > splitting the node up and using ti,j721e-system-controller to describe > the syscon > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> > --- > .../boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 21 +++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > index b58a31371bf3..7653cb191be1 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > @@ -338,18 +338,27 @@ mcu_spi2: spi@40320000 { > status = "disabled"; > }; > > - fss: syscon@47000000 { > - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > + hbmc_syscon: syscon@47000000 { > + compatible = "ti,j721e-system-controller", "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > reg = <0x00 0x47000000 0x00 0x100>; Description is given upto 0x78 register in TRM (Section 12.3.1.6 FSS Registers) Should we limit length to 0x78 ? > - #address-cells = <2>; > - #size-cells = <2>; > - ranges; > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + ranges = <0x00 0x00 0x47000000 0x100>; > > - hbmc_mux: hbmc-mux { > + hbmc_mux: mux-controller@4 { > compatible = "mmio-mux"; > + reg = <0x4 0x2>; > #mux-control-cells = <1>; > mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */ > }; > + }; > + > + fss: bus@47030000 { > + compatible = "simple-bus"; > + reg = <0x0 0x47030000 0x0 0x100>; Only registers upto address 0x47030008 has valid description in TRM Section, 13.3.3.6.3 HyperBus Subsystem Registers Please see, if we need to limit length to 8 instead of 256 > + #address-cells = <2>; > + #size-cells = <2>; > + ranges; > > hbmc: hyperbus@47034000 { > compatible = "ti,am654-hbmc";
On 4/24/23 12:36 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > fss node claims to be entirely a syscon node, but it is really two > parts of it - one a syscon that controls the hbmc mux and a simple bus > where ospi, hbmc peripherals are located. So model it accordingly by > splitting the node up and using ti,j721e-system-controller to describe > the syscon > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> > --- > .../boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 21 +++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > index b58a31371bf3..7653cb191be1 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > @@ -338,18 +338,27 @@ mcu_spi2: spi@40320000 { > status = "disabled"; > }; > > - fss: syscon@47000000 { > - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > + hbmc_syscon: syscon@47000000 { > + compatible = "ti,j721e-system-controller", "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > reg = <0x00 0x47000000 0x00 0x100>; > - #address-cells = <2>; > - #size-cells = <2>; > - ranges; > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + ranges = <0x00 0x00 0x47000000 0x100>; > > - hbmc_mux: hbmc-mux { > + hbmc_mux: mux-controller@4 { > compatible = "mmio-mux"; > + reg = <0x4 0x2>; > #mux-control-cells = <1>; > mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */ > }; > + }; > + > + fss: bus@47030000 { > + compatible = "simple-bus"; > + reg = <0x0 0x47030000 0x0 0x100>; > + #address-cells = <2>; > + #size-cells = <2>; > + ranges; > > hbmc: hyperbus@47034000 { > compatible = "ti,am654-hbmc"; I hope all the things you had to do here show you what I mean in my comments on [0] :) I've posted a first step patch that allows "reg-mux" node to work with regular reg properties[1]. Which means this patch could have been just this: --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi @@ -305,15 +305,16 @@ wkup_i2c0: i2c@42120000 { status = "disabled"; }; - fss: syscon@47000000 { - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd"; + fss: bus@47000000 { + compatible = "simple-bus"; reg = <0x00 0x47000000 0x00 0x100>; #address-cells = <2>; #size-cells = <2>; ranges; hbmc_mux: hbmc-mux { - compatible = "mmio-mux"; + compatible = "reg-mux"; + reg = <0x00 0x47000004 0x00 0x2>; #mux-control-cells = <1>; mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */ }; Andrew [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/76da0b98-3274-b047-db11-ecabc117ae11@ti.com/ [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230424184810.29453-1-afd@ti.com/
On 13:55-20230424, Andrew Davis wrote: > On 4/24/23 12:36 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > fss node claims to be entirely a syscon node, but it is really two > > parts of it - one a syscon that controls the hbmc mux and a simple bus > > where ospi, hbmc peripherals are located. So model it accordingly by > > splitting the node up and using ti,j721e-system-controller to describe > > the syscon > > > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> > > --- > > .../boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 21 +++++++++++++------ > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > > index b58a31371bf3..7653cb191be1 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > > @@ -338,18 +338,27 @@ mcu_spi2: spi@40320000 { > > status = "disabled"; > > }; > > - fss: syscon@47000000 { > > - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > > + hbmc_syscon: syscon@47000000 { > > + compatible = "ti,j721e-system-controller", "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > > reg = <0x00 0x47000000 0x00 0x100>; > > - #address-cells = <2>; > > - #size-cells = <2>; > > - ranges; > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > + ranges = <0x00 0x00 0x47000000 0x100>; > > - hbmc_mux: hbmc-mux { > > + hbmc_mux: mux-controller@4 { > > compatible = "mmio-mux"; > > + reg = <0x4 0x2>; > > #mux-control-cells = <1>; > > mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */ > > }; > > + }; > > + > > + fss: bus@47030000 { > > + compatible = "simple-bus"; > > + reg = <0x0 0x47030000 0x0 0x100>; > > + #address-cells = <2>; > > + #size-cells = <2>; > > + ranges; > > hbmc: hyperbus@47034000 { > > compatible = "ti,am654-hbmc"; > > > I hope all the things you had to do here show you what I mean in my > comments on [0] :) yup. > > I've posted a first step patch that allows "reg-mux" node to work with > regular reg properties[1]. Which means this patch could have been just this: > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > @@ -305,15 +305,16 @@ wkup_i2c0: i2c@42120000 { > status = "disabled"; > }; > - fss: syscon@47000000 { > - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > + fss: bus@47000000 { > + compatible = "simple-bus"; > reg = <0x00 0x47000000 0x00 0x100>; > #address-cells = <2>; > #size-cells = <2>; > ranges; > hbmc_mux: hbmc-mux { > - compatible = "mmio-mux"; > + compatible = "reg-mux"; > + reg = <0x00 0x47000004 0x00 0x2>; > #mux-control-cells = <1>; > mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */ > }; > > Andrew > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/76da0b98-3274-b047-db11-ecabc117ae11@ti.com/ > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230424184810.29453-1-afd@ti.com/ yes, this is a better approach. Lets see the conclusion of the discussion.
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi index b58a31371bf3..7653cb191be1 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi @@ -338,18 +338,27 @@ mcu_spi2: spi@40320000 { status = "disabled"; }; - fss: syscon@47000000 { - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd"; + hbmc_syscon: syscon@47000000 { + compatible = "ti,j721e-system-controller", "syscon", "simple-mfd"; reg = <0x00 0x47000000 0x00 0x100>; - #address-cells = <2>; - #size-cells = <2>; - ranges; + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + ranges = <0x00 0x00 0x47000000 0x100>; - hbmc_mux: hbmc-mux { + hbmc_mux: mux-controller@4 { compatible = "mmio-mux"; + reg = <0x4 0x2>; #mux-control-cells = <1>; mux-reg-masks = <0x4 0x2>; /* HBMC select */ }; + }; + + fss: bus@47030000 { + compatible = "simple-bus"; + reg = <0x0 0x47030000 0x0 0x100>; + #address-cells = <2>; + #size-cells = <2>; + ranges; hbmc: hyperbus@47034000 { compatible = "ti,am654-hbmc";
fss node claims to be entirely a syscon node, but it is really two parts of it - one a syscon that controls the hbmc mux and a simple bus where ospi, hbmc peripherals are located. So model it accordingly by splitting the node up and using ti,j721e-system-controller to describe the syscon Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> --- .../boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 21 +++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)