[PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: amlogic: Add SoC information bindings
Neil Armstrong
narmstrong at baylibre.com
Tue Apr 4 05:49:44 PDT 2017
On 04/04/2017 02:26 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 3:51 AM, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong at baylibre.com> wrote:
>> On 04/03/2017 06:34 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 04:10:30PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> On 03/31/2017 03:44 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Neil Armstrong
>>>>> <narmstrong at baylibre.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Add bindings for the SoC information register of the Amlogic SoCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong at baylibre.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.txt | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.txt
>>>>>> index bfd5b55..b850985 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.txt
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.txt
>>>>>> @@ -52,3 +52,23 @@ Board compatible values:
>>>>>> - "amlogic,q201" (Meson gxm s912)
>>>>>> - "nexbox,a95x" (Meson gxbb or Meson gxl s905x)
>>>>>> - "nexbox,a1" (Meson gxm s912)
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Amlogic Meson GX SoCs Information
>>>>>> +----------------------------------
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +The Meson SoCs have a Product Register that allows to retrieve SoC type,
>>>>>> +package and revision information. If present, a device node for this register
>>>>>> +should be added.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Required properties:
>>>>>> + - compatible: For Meson GX SoCs, must be "amlogic,meson-gx-socinfo".
>>>>>> + - reg: Base address and length of the register block.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +Examples
>>>>>> +--------
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + chipid at 220 {
>>>>>> + compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-socinfo";
>>>>>> + reg = <0x0 0x00220 0x0 0x4>;
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> The register location would hint that this is in the middle of some block of
>>>>> random registers, i.e. a syscon or some unrelated device.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you sure that "socinfo" is the actual name of the IP block and that
>>>>> it only has a single 32-bit register?
>>>>>
>>>>> Arnd
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Arnd,
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry I did not find any relevant registers in the docs or source code describing
>>>> it in a specific block of registers, and no close enough register definitions either.
>>>> They may be used by the secure firmware I imagine.
>>>>
>>>> For the register name, Amlogic refers it to "cpu_version" in their code, but it really
>>>> gives some details on the whole SoC and package, and socinfo seems better.
>>>
>>> A register at address 0x220 seems a bit strange (unless there's ranges
>>> you're not showing), but ROM code at this address would be fairly
>>> typical. And putting version information into the ROM is also common.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>
>> Hi Rob.
>>
>> Indeed it's part of a larger range :
>> aobus: aobus at c8100000 {
>> compatible = "simple-bus";
>> reg = <0x0 0xc8100000 0x0 0x100000>;
>> #address-cells = <2>;
>> #size-cells = <2>;
>> ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0xc8100000 0x0 0x100000>;
>>
>>
>> While scrubbing on the uboot source, I found a sort of block of registers dedicated to communicate with
>> the secure firmware :
>> AO_SEC_REG0 0x140
>> AO_SEC_REG1 0x144
>> AO_SEC_REG2 0x148
>> AO_SEC_TMODE_PWD0 0x160
>> AO_SEC_TMODE_PWD1 0x164
>> AO_SEC_TMODE_PWD2 0x168
>> AO_SEC_TMODE_PWD3 0x16C
>> AO_SEC_SCRATCH 0x17C
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD0 0x180
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD1 0x184
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD2 0x188
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD3 0x18C
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_SEC_CNTL 0x190
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD_ADDR0 0x194
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD_ADDR1 0x198
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD_ADDR2 0x19C
>> AO_SEC_JTAG_PWD_ADDR3 0x1A0
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG0_0 0x1C0
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG0_1 0x1C4
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG0_2 0x1C8
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG1_0 0x1CC
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG1_1 0x1D0
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG1_2 0x1D4
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG2_0 0x1D8
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG2_1 0x1DC
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG2_2 0x1E0
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG3_0 0x1E4
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG3_1 0x1E8
>> AO_SEC_SHARED_AHB_SRAM_REG3_2 0x1EC
>> AO_SEC_AO_AHB_SRAM_REG0_0 0x1F0
>> AO_SEC_AO_AHB_SRAM_REG0_1 0x1F4
>> AO_SEC_AO_AHB_SRAM_REG1_0 0x1F8
>> AO_SEC_AO_AHB_SRAM_REG1_1 0x1FC
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG8 0x220
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG9 0x224
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG10 0x228
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG11 0x22C
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG12 0x230
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG13 0x234
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG14 0x238
>> AO_SEC_SD_CFG15 0x23C
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG0 0x240
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG1 0x244
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG2 0x248
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG3 0x24C
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG4 0x250
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG5 0x254
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG6 0x258
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG7 0x25C
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG8 0x260
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG9 0x264
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG10 0x268
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG11 0x26C
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG12 0x270
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG13 0x274
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG14 0x278
>> AO_SEC_GP_CFG15 0x27C
>>
>>
>> As you see, the register we use here is AO_SEC_SD_CFG8...
>>
>> Should I define all this block as simple-mfd and refer to it as a regmap ?
>>
>> aobus: aobus at c8100000 {
>> compatible = "simple-bus";
>> reg = <0x0 0xc8100000 0x0 0x100000>;
>> #address-cells = <2>;
>> #size-cells = <2>;
>> ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0xc8100000 0x0 0x100000>;
>>
>> ao_secure: ao-secure at 140 {
>> compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-ao-secure", "simple-mfd";
>> reg = <0x0 0x140 0x0 0x140>;
>> };
>> };
>>
>> chipid {
>> compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-socinfo";
>> ao-secure = <&ao_secure>;
>> chip-info-reg = <0xe0>;
>
> Why even divide it up further in DT? IMO, describing single
> registers/address in DT is too fine grained.
>
> Rob
>
Rob, I don't get it.
Maybe something like that ?
aobus: aobus at c8100000 {
compatible = "simple-bus";
reg = <0x0 0xc8100000 0x0 0x100000>;
#address-cells = <2>;
#size-cells = <2>;
ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0xc8100000 0x0 0x100000>;
ao_secure: ao-secure at 140 {
compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-ao-secure", "simple-mfd", "simple-bus";
reg = <0x0 0x140 0x0 0x140>;
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1>;
chipid at e0 {
compatible = "amlogic,meson-gx-socinfo";
reg = <0xe0 0x4>;
};
};
};
Concerning the fine graining, I'm sorry but the actual information comes from a single register here...
Neil
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list