* [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-16 8:51 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-16 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
optional property.
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
index d1f5eb996dba..838c3ce494de 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ properties:
default: 0x198233
deprecated: true
+ power-domains:
+ maxItems: 1
+
required:
- compatible
- reg
--
2.36.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-16 8:51 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-16 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
optional property.
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
index d1f5eb996dba..838c3ce494de 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@ properties:
default: 0x198233
deprecated: true
+ power-domains:
+ maxItems: 1
+
required:
- compatible
- reg
--
2.36.1
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-16 8:51 ` Michal Simek
@ 2024-02-16 9:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2024-02-16 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
> optional property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> ---
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
compatible.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-16 9:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2024-02-16 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
> optional property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> ---
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
compatible.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-16 9:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2024-02-16 9:42 ` Michal Simek
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-16 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>> optional property.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>
> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
> compatible.
It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
Pretty much with different firmware interface on zynqmp you can describe it too
(and doesn't really matter if it is separated in HW or common for more IPs).
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-16 9:42 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-16 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>> optional property.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>
> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
> compatible.
It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
Pretty much with different firmware interface on zynqmp you can describe it too
(and doesn't really matter if it is separated in HW or common for more IPs).
Thanks,
Michal
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-16 9:42 ` Michal Simek
@ 2024-02-17 8:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2024-02-17 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>> optional property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>> compatible.
>
> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
also require it (on versal).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-17 8:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2024-02-17 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>> optional property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>> compatible.
>
> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
also require it (on versal).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-17 8:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2024-02-19 13:11 ` Michal Simek
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-19 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>>> optional property.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>
>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>>> compatible.
>>
>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>
> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
> also require it (on versal).
I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not shared
one as is in zynqmp case).
Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change setting
of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need to be owner
of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required property.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-19 13:11 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-19 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>>> optional property.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>
>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>>> compatible.
>>
>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>
> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
> also require it (on versal).
I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not shared
one as is in zynqmp case).
Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change setting
of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need to be owner
of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required property.
Thanks,
Michal
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-19 13:11 ` Michal Simek
@ 2024-02-19 13:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2024-02-19 13:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 19/02/2024 14:11, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>>>> optional property.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>>>> compatible.
>>>
>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>>
>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
>> also require it (on versal).
>
> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
> same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not shared
> one as is in zynqmp case).
What does it mean shared one? If several devices share power domain,
then they all should have power-domains property.
>
> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change setting
> of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need to be owner
> of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required property.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-19 13:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2024-02-19 13:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 19/02/2024 14:11, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>>>> optional property.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>>>> compatible.
>>>
>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>>
>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
>> also require it (on versal).
>
> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
> same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not shared
> one as is in zynqmp case).
What does it mean shared one? If several devices share power domain,
then they all should have power-domains property.
>
> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change setting
> of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need to be owner
> of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required property.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-19 13:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
@ 2024-02-19 13:21 ` Michal Simek
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-19 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/19/24 14:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 19/02/2024 14:11, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>>>>> optional property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>>>>> compatible.
>>>>
>>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>>>
>>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
>>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
>>> also require it (on versal).
>>
>> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
>> same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not shared
>> one as is in zynqmp case).
>
> What does it mean shared one? If several devices share power domain,
> then they all should have power-domains property.
Shared one means that the same power domain is shared with other IPs or simply
enabled by default without any option to disable it.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-19 13:21 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-19 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git
Cc: Alexandre Belloni, Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski,
Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/19/24 14:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 19/02/2024 14:11, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>>>>> optional property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>>>>> compatible.
>>>>
>>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>>>
>>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
>>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
>>> also require it (on versal).
>>
>> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
>> same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not shared
>> one as is in zynqmp case).
>
> What does it mean shared one? If several devices share power domain,
> then they all should have power-domains property.
Shared one means that the same power domain is shared with other IPs or simply
enabled by default without any option to disable it.
Thanks,
Michal
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-19 13:11 ` Michal Simek
@ 2024-02-19 20:19 ` Alexandre Belloni
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2024-02-19 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
> > > > > optional property.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
> > > > compatible.
> > >
> > > It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
> >
> > Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> > identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
> > also require it (on versal).
>
> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
> same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not
> shared one as is in zynqmp case).
>
> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change
> setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need
> to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required
> property.
I guess because the integration is different, you still need a
differente compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-19 20:19 ` Alexandre Belloni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Belloni @ 2024-02-19 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
> > > > > optional property.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
> > > > compatible.
> > >
> > > It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
> >
> > Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> > identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
> > also require it (on versal).
>
> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the
> same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not
> shared one as is in zynqmp case).
>
> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change
> setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need
> to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required
> property.
I guess because the integration is different, you still need a
differente compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-19 20:19 ` Alexandre Belloni
@ 2024-02-20 10:51 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Buddhabhatti, Jay @ 2024-02-20 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni, Simek, Michal
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
Hi Alexandre,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:49 AM
> To: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; open
> list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
> <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE
> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC)
> SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
> property
>
> On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > > On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > > RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why
> > > > > > describe it as optional property.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3
> +++
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only
> > > > > one compatible.
> > > >
> > > > It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
> > >
> > > Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> > > identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal
> > > and also require it (on versal).
> >
> > I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is
> > exactly the same. What it is different is that there is own power
> > domain to it (not shared one as is in zynqmp case).
> >
> > Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to
> > change setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux
> > doesn't need to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't
> > be required property.
>
> I guess because the integration is different, you still need a differente
> compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
[Jay] RTC has its own power domain in case of Versal and ZynqMP both that we double check it.
Thanks,
Jay
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michal
>
> --
> Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel
> engineering https://bootlin.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-20 10:51 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Buddhabhatti, Jay @ 2024-02-20 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Belloni, Simek, Michal
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
Hi Alexandre,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:49 AM
> To: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; open
> list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
> <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE
> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC)
> SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
> property
>
> On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > > On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > > RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why
> > > > > > describe it as optional property.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3
> +++
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only
> > > > > one compatible.
> > > >
> > > > It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
> > >
> > > Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> > > identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal
> > > and also require it (on versal).
> >
> > I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is
> > exactly the same. What it is different is that there is own power
> > domain to it (not shared one as is in zynqmp case).
> >
> > Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to
> > change setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux
> > doesn't need to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't
> > be required property.
>
> I guess because the integration is different, you still need a differente
> compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
[Jay] RTC has its own power domain in case of Versal and ZynqMP both that we double check it.
Thanks,
Jay
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michal
>
> --
> Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel
> engineering https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-20 10:51 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
@ 2024-02-20 11:34 ` Michal Simek
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-20 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Buddhabhatti, Jay, Alexandre Belloni
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/20/24 11:51, Buddhabhatti, Jay wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:49 AM
>> To: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
>> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
>> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
>> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
>> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; open
>> list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
>> <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE
>> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC)
>> SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
>> property
>>
>> On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why
>>>>>>> describe it as optional property.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3
>> +++
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only
>>>>>> one compatible.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>>>>
>>>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
>>>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal
>>>> and also require it (on versal).
>>>
>>> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is
>>> exactly the same. What it is different is that there is own power
>>> domain to it (not shared one as is in zynqmp case).
>>>
>>> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to
>>> change setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux
>>> doesn't need to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't
>>> be required property.
>>
>> I guess because the integration is different, you still need a differente
>> compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
>
> [Jay] RTC has its own power domain in case of Versal and ZynqMP both that we double check it.
Thanks Jay for looking into it. I should definitely update my commit message to
reflect it. Do you still want me to create soc specific property?
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-20 11:34 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2024-02-20 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Buddhabhatti, Jay, Alexandre Belloni
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
On 2/20/24 11:51, Buddhabhatti, Jay wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:49 AM
>> To: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
>> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
>> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
>> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
>> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; open
>> list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
>> <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE
>> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC)
>> SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
>> property
>>
>> On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why
>>>>>>> describe it as optional property.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3
>> +++
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only
>>>>>> one compatible.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
>>>>
>>>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
>>>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal
>>>> and also require it (on versal).
>>>
>>> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is
>>> exactly the same. What it is different is that there is own power
>>> domain to it (not shared one as is in zynqmp case).
>>>
>>> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to
>>> change setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux
>>> doesn't need to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't
>>> be required property.
>>
>> I guess because the integration is different, you still need a differente
>> compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
>
> [Jay] RTC has its own power domain in case of Versal and ZynqMP both that we double check it.
Thanks Jay for looking into it. I should definitely update my commit message to
reflect it. Do you still want me to create soc specific property?
Thanks,
Michal
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
2024-02-20 11:34 ` Michal Simek
@ 2024-02-20 11:45 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Buddhabhatti, Jay @ 2024-02-20 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simek, Michal, Alexandre Belloni
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
Hi Michal,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 5:04 PM
> To: Buddhabhatti, Jay <jay.buddhabhatti@amd.com>; Alexandre Belloni
> <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; open
> list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
> <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE
> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC)
> SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
> property
>
>
>
> On 2/20/24 11:51, Buddhabhatti, Jay wrote:
> > Hi Alexandre,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:49 AM
> >> To: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
> >> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
> >> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
> >> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof
> >> Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring
> >> <robh@kernel.org>; open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE
> TREE
> >> BINDINGS <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ
> >> ARCHITECTURE <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL
> >> TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
> >> property
> >>
> >> On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why
> >>>>>>> describe it as optional property.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml |
> >>>>>>> 3
> >> +++
> >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only
> >>>>>> one compatible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
> >>>>
> >>>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> >>>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal
> >>>> and also require it (on versal).
> >>>
> >>> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is
> >>> exactly the same. What it is different is that there is own power
> >>> domain to it (not shared one as is in zynqmp case).
> >>>
> >>> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to
> >>> change setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that
> >>> Linux doesn't need to be owner of any power domain that's why it
> >>> shouldn't be required property.
> >>
> >> I guess because the integration is different, you still need a
> >> differente compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
> >
> > [Jay] RTC has its own power domain in case of Versal and ZynqMP both that
> we double check it.
>
> Thanks Jay for looking into it. I should definitely update my commit message to
> reflect it. Do you still want me to create soc specific property?
[Jay] This should be for both ZynqMP and Versal since RTC have its own power domain we should add power domain property for both SoCs.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
@ 2024-02-20 11:45 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Buddhabhatti, Jay @ 2024-02-20 11:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simek, Michal, Alexandre Belloni
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, linux-kernel, monstr, michal.simek, git,
Conor Dooley, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Rob Herring,
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS,
moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE,
open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM
Hi Michal,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 5:04 PM
> To: Buddhabhatti, Jay <jay.buddhabhatti@amd.com>; Alexandre Belloni
> <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; open
> list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
> <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE
> <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC)
> SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
> property
>
>
>
> On 2/20/24 11:51, Buddhabhatti, Jay wrote:
> > Hi Alexandre,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:49 AM
> >> To: Simek, Michal <michal.simek@amd.com>
> >> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>; linux-
> >> kernel@vger.kernel.org; monstr@monstr.eu; michal.simek@xilinx.com;
> >> git@xilinx.com; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Krzysztof
> >> Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>; Rob Herring
> >> <robh@kernel.org>; open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE
> TREE
> >> BINDINGS <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>; moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ
> >> ARCHITECTURE <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>; open list:REAL
> >> TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains
> >> property
> >>
> >> On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>>>>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why
> >>>>>>> describe it as optional property.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml |
> >>>>>>> 3
> >> +++
> >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only
> >>>>>> one compatible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
> >>>>
> >>>> Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
> >>>> identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal
> >>>> and also require it (on versal).
> >>>
> >>> I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is
> >>> exactly the same. What it is different is that there is own power
> >>> domain to it (not shared one as is in zynqmp case).
> >>>
> >>> Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to
> >>> change setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that
> >>> Linux doesn't need to be owner of any power domain that's why it
> >>> shouldn't be required property.
> >>
> >> I guess because the integration is different, you still need a
> >> differente compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal.
> >
> > [Jay] RTC has its own power domain in case of Versal and ZynqMP both that
> we double check it.
>
> Thanks Jay for looking into it. I should definitely update my commit message to
> reflect it. Do you still want me to create soc specific property?
[Jay] This should be for both ZynqMP and Versal since RTC have its own power domain we should add power domain property for both SoCs.
>
> Thanks,
> Michal
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-20 11:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-02-16 8:51 [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property Michal Simek
2024-02-16 8:51 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-16 9:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-02-16 9:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-02-16 9:42 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-16 9:42 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-17 8:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-02-17 8:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-02-19 13:11 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-19 13:11 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-19 13:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-02-19 13:19 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-02-19 13:21 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-19 13:21 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-19 20:19 ` Alexandre Belloni
2024-02-19 20:19 ` Alexandre Belloni
2024-02-20 10:51 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
2024-02-20 10:51 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
2024-02-20 11:34 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-20 11:34 ` Michal Simek
2024-02-20 11:45 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
2024-02-20 11:45 ` Buddhabhatti, Jay
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.