[PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add minimal dts/dtsi files for sdm845 SoC and MTP
Rob Herring
robh at kernel.org
Tue Feb 6 12:26:13 PST 2018
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 01/25, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-mtp.dts
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-mtp.dtsi
>
> Do we really need two files? Maybe collapse the two?
>
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
>> diff --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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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 at 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.
>
>> + };
>> +
>> + 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?
>
>> + <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.
>
>> + };
>> +
>> + 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?
>
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges = <0 0 0 0xffffffff>;
>> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>> +
>> + intc: interrupt-controller at 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.
>
>> + };
>> +
>> + gcc: clock-controller at 100000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,gcc-sdm845";
>> + reg = <0x100000 0x1f0000>;
>> + #clock-cells = <1>;
>> + #reset-cells = <1>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + tlmm: pinctrl at 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
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list