[PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add base DT for rk3528 SoC

[Yao Zi]

On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 03:25:47PM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote:
> On 2024-08-04 15:20, Yao Zi wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 12:05:11PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 03/08/2024 14:55, Yao Zi wrote:
> > > > This initial device tree describes CPU, interrupts and UART on the chip
> > > > and is able to boot into basic kernel with only UART. Cache information
> > > > is omitted for now as there is no precise documentation. Support for
> > > > other features will be added later.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yao Zi <ziyao at disroot.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3528.dtsi | 182 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 182 insertions(+)
> > > >  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3528.dtsi
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3528.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3528.dtsi
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..77687d9e7e80
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3528.dtsi
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
> > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * Copyright (c) 2022 Rockchip Electronics Co., Ltd.
> > > > + * Copyright (c) 2024 Yao Zi <ziyao at disroot.org>
> > > > + */
> > > > +
> > > > +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> > > > +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > > > +
> > > > +/ {
> > > > +	compatible = "rockchip,rk3528";
> > > > +
> > > > +	interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
> > > > +	#address-cells = <2>;
> > > > +	#size-cells = <2>;
> > > > +
> > > > +	aliases {
> > > > +		serial0 = &uart0;
> > > > +		serial1 = &uart1;
> > > > +		serial2 = &uart2;
> > > > +		serial3 = &uart3;
> > > > +		serial4 = &uart4;
> > > > +		serial5 = &uart5;
> > > > +		serial6 = &uart6;
> > > > +		serial7 = &uart7;
> > > > +	};
> > > > +
> > > > +	cpus {
> > > > +		#address-cells = <1>;
> > > > +		#size-cells = <0>;
> > > > +
> > > > +		cpu-map {
> > > > +			cluster0 {
> > > > +				core0 {
> > > > +					cpu = <&cpu0>;
> > > > +				};
> > > > +				core1 {
> > > > +					cpu = <&cpu1>;
> > > > +				};
> > > > +				core2 {
> > > > +					cpu = <&cpu2>;
> > > > +				};
> > > > +				core3 {
> > > > +					cpu = <&cpu3>;
> > > > +				};
> > > > +			};
> > > > +		};
> > > > +
> > > > +		cpu0: cpu at 0 {
> > > > +			device_type = "cpu";
> > > > +			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53";
> > > > +			reg = <0x0>;
> > > > +			enable-method = "psci";
> > > > +		};
> > > > +
> > > > +		cpu1: cpu at 1 {
> > > > +			device_type = "cpu";
> > > > +			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53";
> > > > +			reg = <0x1>;
> > > > +			enable-method = "psci";
> > > > +		};
> > > > +
> > > > +		cpu2: cpu at 2 {
> > > > +			device_type = "cpu";
> > > > +			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53";
> > > > +			reg = <0x2>;
> > > > +			enable-method = "psci";
> > > > +		};
> > > > +
> > > > +		cpu3: cpu at 3 {
> > > > +			device_type = "cpu";
> > > > +			compatible = "arm,cortex-a53";
> > > > +			reg = <0x3>;
> > > > +			enable-method = "psci";
> > > > +		};
> > > > +	};
> > > > +
> > > > +	psci {
> > > > +		compatible = "arm,psci-1.0", "arm,psci-0.2";
> > > > +		method = "smc";
> > > > +	};
> > > > +
> > > > +	timer {
> > > > +		compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
> > > > +		interrupts = <GIC_PPI 13 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
> > > > +			     <GIC_PPI 14 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
> > > > +			     <GIC_PPI 11 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
> > > > +			     <GIC_PPI 10 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>;
> > > > +	};
> > > > +
> > > > +	xin24m: xin24m {
> > > 
> > > Please use name for all fixed clocks which matches current format
> > > recommendation: 'clock-([0-9]+|[a-z0-9-]+)+'
> > 
> > Will be fixed in next revision.
> 
> Hmm, why should we apply that rule to the xin24m clock, which is
> named exactly like that everywhere else in Rockchip SoC dtsi files?
> It's much better to remain consistent.

Historical reasons should not affect new code. And if we don't follow
the new rules now, they may never get followed.

Best regards,
Yao Zi

> 
> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/fixed-clock.yaml?h=v6.11-rc1
> > > 
> > > > +		compatible = "fixed-clock";
> > > > +		#clock-cells = <0>;
> > > > +		clock-frequency = <24000000>;
> > > > +		clock-output-names = "xin24m";
> > > > +	};
> > > > +
> > > > +	gic: interrupt-controller at fed01000 {
> > > 
> > > Why this all is outside of SoC?
> > 
> > Just as Heiko says, device tree for all other Rockchip SoCs don't have
> > a "soc" node. I didn't know why before but just follow the style.
> > 
> > If you prefer add a soc node, I am willing to.