[PATCH v3 1/8] dt-bindings: power: Add T-HEAD TH1520 GPU power sequencer

[Michal Wilczynski]

On 6/3/25 15:35, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:19 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 10:29:13PM GMT, Michal Wilczynski wrote:
>>>>> +description: |
>>>>> +  This binding describes the power sequencer for the T-HEAD TH1520 GPU.
>>>>> +  This sequencer handles the specific power-up and power-down sequences
>>>>> +  required by the GPU, including managing clocks and resets from both the
>>>>> +  sequencer and the GPU device itself.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +properties:
>>>>> +  compatible:
>>>>> +    const: thead,th1520-gpu-pwrseq
>>>>> +
>>>>
>>>> Before I review the rest: is this actually a physical device that
>>>> takes care of the power sequencing? Some kind of a power management
>>>> unit for the GPU? If so, I bet it's not called "power sequencer" so
>>>> let's use its actual name as per the datasheet?
>>>
>>> Hi Bart,
>>> Thanks for your feedback.
>>>
>>> The hardware block responsible for powering up the components in the
>>> TH1520 SoC datasheet is called AON (Always On). However, we already have
>>> a DT node named aon that serves as a power domain provider
>>> (Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/thead,th1520-aon.yaml).
>>
>> So no. One device, one device node (sometimes with cildren nodes). You
>> do not get another device node just because someone wrote incomplete
>> binding or because driver looks differently.

The child option could potentially be an option here, as it would make
some sense, at least for me - since the child pwrseq DT node would
describe part of the AON block.

>>
>>>
>>> Following the discussion [1] about needing a separate DT node for the
>>> power sequencing capabilities of this AON block, and thinking further
>>> about it, I think the binding should be more generic. The AON block can
>>> manage power sequences for more than just the GPU (e.g. NPU, AUDIO,
>>> DSP).
>>>
>>> The compatible string could be updated like so:
>>> "thead,th1520-aon-pwrseq"
>>
>> Should not be separate node, you already have one for AON.
>>
> 
> Agreed. And as far as implementation goes, you can have the same
> driver be a PM domain AND pwrseq provider. It just has to bind to the
> device node that represents an actual component, not a made-up
> "convenience" node.

Sure - this can be done using existing AON node.

To keep the pwrseq code organized in drivers/power/sequencing/, a
similar approach to our th1520-pd driver interfacing with the AON
firmware library (drivers/firmware/thead,th1520-aon.c) could work.

The idea would be to treat code like pwrseq-thead-aon.c (changed from a
current pwrseq-thead-gpu.c) as a library. It would export its necessary
functions (e.g., for specific sequence init/deinit steps) using
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. The main AON driver would then call these to provide
the pwrseq functionality.

This will introduce a compile-time dependency, as expected.

An alternative would be to keep the driver in drivers/power/sequencing/
as a platform driver and start it up using, for example, an auxiliary
bus. This is similar to what the JH7110 clock driver
(drivers/clk/starfive/clk-starfive-jh7110-sys.c) is doing with a reset
driver. This could offer a cleaner separation of roles if that's
preferred.

Please let me know which way would be preferred.

> 
> Bartosz
> 

Best regards,
-- 
Michal Wilczynski <m.wilczynski at samsung.com>