[PATCH v2 1/7] dt-bindings: npu: rockchip,rknn: Add bindings

[Tomeu Vizoso]

Hi Rob,

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 5:02 PM Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 08:55:47AM +0100, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > Add the bindings for the Neural Processing Unit IP from Rockchip.
> >
> > v2:
> > - Adapt to new node structure (one node per core, each with its own
> >   IOMMU)
> > - Several misc. fixes from Sebastian Reichel
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel at collabora.com>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/npu/rockchip,rknn-core.yaml           | 152 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 152 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/npu/rockchip,rknn-core.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/npu/rockchip,rknn-core.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..e8d0afe4a7d1c4f166cf13a9f4aa7c1901362a3f
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/npu/rockchip,rknn-core.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/npu/rockchip,rknn-core.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Neural Processing Unit IP from Rockchip
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > +  - Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net>
> > +
> > +description:
> > +  Rockchip IP for accelerating inference of neural networks, based on NVIDIA's
> > +  open source NVDLA IP.
> > +
> > +properties:
> > +  $nodename:
> > +    pattern: '^npu-core@[a-f0-9]+$'
> > +
> > +  compatible:
> > +    oneOf:
> > +      - items:
> > +          - enum:
> > +              - rockchip,rk3588-rknn-core-top
> > +          - const: rockchip,rknn-core-top
>
> Drop the fallbacks unless you have some evidence that the IP is the
> same across a lot of SoCs. If you don't, then
> rockchip,rk3588-rknn-core-top can be the fallback whenever there are
> more compatible SoCs.
>
> Or if there's version/feature registers that otherwise make it
> discoverable, then a common compatible is fine.
>
> > +      - items:
> > +          - enum:
> > +              - rockchip,rk3588-rknn-core
> > +          - const: rockchip,rknn-core
>
> I don't understand the difference between core and core-top. That needs
> to be explained in the top-level description.
>
> > +
> > +  reg:
> > +    maxItems: 1
> > +
> > +  clocks:
> > +    minItems: 2
> > +    maxItems: 4
> > +
> > +  clock-names:
> > +    items:
> > +      - const: aclk
> > +      - const: hclk
> > +      - const: npu
> > +      - const: pclk
> > +    minItems: 2
> > +
> > +  interrupts:
> > +    maxItems: 1
> > +
> > +  iommus:
> > +    maxItems: 1
> > +
> > +  npu-supply: true
> > +
> > +  power-domains:
> > +    maxItems: 1
> > +
> > +  resets:
> > +    maxItems: 2
> > +
> > +  reset-names:
> > +    items:
> > +      - const: srst_a
> > +      - const: srst_h
> > +
> > +  sram-supply: true
>
> Group supply properties together
>
> > +
> > +required:
> > +  - compatible
> > +  - reg
> > +  - clocks
> > +  - clock-names
> > +  - interrupts
> > +  - iommus
> > +  - npu-supply
> > +  - power-domains
> > +  - resets
> > +  - reset-names
> > +  - sram-supply
> > +
> > +allOf:
> > +  - if:
> > +      properties:
> > +        compatible:
> > +          contains:
> > +            enum:
> > +              - rockchip,rknn-core-top
> > +    then:
> > +      properties:
> > +        clocks:
> > +          minItems: 4
> > +
> > +        clock-names:
> > +          minItems: 4
> > +  - if:
> > +      properties:
> > +        compatible:
> > +          contains:
> > +            enum:
> > +              - rockchip,rknn-core
> > +    then:
> > +      properties:
> > +        clocks:
> > +          maxItems: 2
> > +        clock-names:
> > +          maxItems: 2
> > +
> > +additionalProperties: false
> > +
> > +examples:
> > +  - |
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/clock/rockchip,rk3588-cru.h>
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/power/rk3588-power.h>
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/reset/rockchip,rk3588-cru.h>
> > +
> > +    bus {
> > +      #address-cells = <2>;
> > +      #size-cells = <2>;
> > +
> > +      rknn_core_top: npu-core at fdab0000 {
>
> npu at ...

Can you extend on why you would prefer to have npu@? As each node
corresponds to a core inside the NPU, I went with npu-core at .

Thanks,

Tomeu

> > +        compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-rknn-core-top", "rockchip,rknn-core-top";
> > +        reg = <0x0 0xfdab0000 0x0 0x9000>;
> > +        assigned-clocks = <&scmi_clk SCMI_CLK_NPU>;
> > +        assigned-clock-rates = <200000000>;
> > +        clocks = <&cru ACLK_NPU0>, <&cru HCLK_NPU0>,
> > +                 <&scmi_clk SCMI_CLK_NPU>, <&cru PCLK_NPU_ROOT>;
> > +        clock-names = "aclk", "hclk", "npu", "pclk";
> > +        interrupts = <GIC_SPI 110 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 0>;
> > +        iommus = <&rknn_mmu_top>;
> > +        npu-supply = <&vdd_npu_s0>;
> > +        power-domains = <&power RK3588_PD_NPUTOP>;
> > +        resets = <&cru SRST_A_RKNN0>, <&cru SRST_H_RKNN0>;
> > +        reset-names = "srst_a", "srst_h";
> > +        sram-supply = <&vdd_npu_mem_s0>;
> > +      };
> > +
> > +      rknn_core_1: npu-core at fdac0000 {
> > +        compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-rknn-core", "rockchip,rknn-core";
> > +        reg = <0x0 0xfdac0000 0x0 0x9000>;
> > +        clocks = <&cru ACLK_NPU1>, <&cru HCLK_NPU1>;
> > +        clock-names = "aclk", "hclk";
> > +        interrupts = <GIC_SPI 111 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 0>;
> > +        iommus = <&rknn_mmu_1>;
> > +        npu-supply = <&vdd_npu_s0>;
> > +        power-domains = <&power RK3588_PD_NPU1>;
> > +        resets = <&cru SRST_A_RKNN1>, <&cru SRST_H_RKNN1>;
> > +        reset-names = "srst_a", "srst_h";
> > +        sram-supply = <&vdd_npu_mem_s0>;
> > +      };
> > +    };
> > +...
> >
> > --
> > 2.48.1
> >