[PATCH v9 6/7] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j721e-sk: Add TPS6594 family PMICs

[Nishanth Menon]

On 11:01-20231207, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
> Hi Nishanth, Udit,
> 
> On 07/12/23 10:12, Kumar, Udit wrote:
> > 
> > On 12/5/2023 8:46 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> > > On 15:04-20231205, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
> > > > This patch adds support for TPS6594 PMIC family on wakeup I2C0 bus.
> > > > These devices provide regulators (bucks and LDOs), but also GPIOs, a
> > > > RTC, a watchdog, an ESM (Error Signal Monitor) which monitors the SoC
> > > > error output signal, and a PFSM (Pre-configurable Finite State Machine)
> > > > which manages the operational modes of the PMIC.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis at ti.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-sk.dts | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >   1 file changed, 158 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-sk.dts
> > > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-sk.dts
> > > > index 42fe8eee9ec8..e600825f7e78 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-sk.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-sk.dts
> > > > @@ -459,6 +459,13 @@ J721E_IOPAD(0x234, PIN_INPUT, 7) /* (U3)
> > > > EXT_REFCLK1.GPIO1_12 */
> > > >   };
> > > >   &wkup_pmx0 {
> > > > +    pmic_irq_pins_default: pmic-irq-default-pins {
> > > > +        bootph-pre-ram;
> > > > +        pinctrl-single,pins = <
> > > > +            J721E_WKUP_IOPAD(0x0cc, PIN_INPUT, 7) /* (G28) WKUP_GPIO0_7 */
> > > > +        >;
> > > > +    };
> > > > +
> > > >       mcu_cpsw_pins_default: mcu-cpsw-default-pins {
> > > >           pinctrl-single,pins = <
> > > >               J721E_WKUP_IOPAD(0x84, PIN_INPUT, 0) /* (B24) MCU_RGMII1_RD0 */
> > > > @@ -560,6 +567,157 @@ eeprom at 51 {
> > > >           compatible = "atmel,24c512";
> > > >           reg = <0x51>;
> > > >       };
> > > > +
> > > > +    tps659413: pmic at 48 {
> > > > +        bootph-pre-ram;
> > > only for the leaf nodes. See
> > > https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/armlinux/2023-10-19
> > 
> > 
> > AFAIK, please correct me, u-boot still needs in all nodes ?
> > 
> 
> That's what I believe as well, is it better to have only the leaf nodes in
> kernel and have U-Boot DTSI handle the parent bootph properties? If so I'll
> send out v10 making change accordingly.
> 

Yes, u-boot today needs it in all nodes. BUT, u-boot needs to be fixed in
line to obey the rules of the schema convention that Rob clarified in
the discussion above.

The other choice is NOT to introduce new bootph properties till u-boot
is fixed up (this is also why I haven't sent out further updates for
bootph properties for kernel in this cycle).

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D