From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46FA0C5517A for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:42:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B1220704 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:42:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604605338; bh=2f8uBDBd6vZ1Bi+z6mfdu/D7TFmbVBfMJ95MTlLW1M0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=vFSu6mFimjvpC1GkcNGyPt4wkf8I/S04GDJrQHA623LfoaFFC3+qiwkm5tYO2TdJZ 7mfdyy0i4Nmk8uIx8oPbLN0eAggAYbuSlRRJziQq4tWpOqhlAWE46YDnyQa8OmfXCI 0XkayDUq6IgVo+zTrmHPH/yLGTNgrKA0xgldkqOg= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731060AbgKETmP (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:42:15 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49508 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731740AbgKETmO (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:42:14 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f50.google.com (mail-ot1-f50.google.com [209.85.210.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5387820936; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:42:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604605333; bh=2f8uBDBd6vZ1Bi+z6mfdu/D7TFmbVBfMJ95MTlLW1M0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=mQy6h2uw/FOfqG3jyuJJ0aIBcbjDQD9uwYzHzFpYvQ9QUBDBcIb+nl32FahOi0r// TxiWznPhi/PuNKfqYXqiP8n3W7yZw9yKQof72L2eLa8SG5zMyHPkuJ9w2UuC5k51Az eWWlonNS/Yo4HCK5uM4DY4bLJPMImlSrlLx/biAs= Received: by mail-ot1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 79so2538388otc.7; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:42:13 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533WGcMHxSfkZrIxS7gKZKbp0XR+E1vru5fBa1P/YgoNp4Q4Q8OE FbiBUE0rSYQJMi21Y5WCnOByx7DyxLBbPlYFOw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+z0PQIDRqCFUJ6autn65Xzx2Zcq1tqbTGIqs3u22M5W508faJrZaTDa86EG65WOHy4dXQ/zi8XYANvzKPXck= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5e14:: with SMTP id d20mr2606861oti.107.1604605332504; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:42:12 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200922223930.4710-1-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> <20200922223930.4710-5-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> <20200929183601.GA892636@bogus> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Herring Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:42:01 -0600 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings To: Ben Levinsky Cc: Stefano Stabellini , Michal Simek , "michael.auchter@ni.com" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "mathieu.poirier@linaro.org" , "Ed T. Mooring" , "linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Jason Wu , Jiaying Liang Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 11:21 AM Ben Levinsky wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Herring > > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 11:36 AM > > To: Ben Levinsky > > Cc: Stefano Stabellini ; Michal Simek > > ; michael.auchter@ni.com; devicetree@vger.kernel.or= g; > > mathieu.poirier@linaro.org; Ed T. Mooring ; linux- > > remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- > > kernel@lists.infradead.org; Jason Wu ; Jiaying Liang > > ; Michal Simek > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation= for > > ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 03:39:29PM -0700, Ben Levinsky wrote: > > > Add binding for ZynqMP R5 OpenAMP. > > > > > > Represent the RPU domain resources in one device node. Each RPU > > > processor is a subnode of the top RPU domain node. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wu > > > Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky > > > --- > > > v3: > > > - update zynqmp_r5 yaml parsing to not raise warnings for extra > > > information in children of R5 node. The warning "node has a unit > > > name, but no reg or ranges property" will still be raised though > > > as this particular node is needed to describe the > > > '#address-cells' and '#size-cells' information. > > > v4:: > > > - remove warning '/example-0/rpu@ff9a0000/r5@0: > > > node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property' > > > by adding reg to r5 node. > > > v5: > > > - update device tree sample and yaml parsing to not raise any warning= s > > > - description for memory-region in yaml parsing > > > - compatible string in yaml parsing for TCM > > > v6: > > > - remove coupling TCM nodes with remoteproc > > > - remove mailbox as it is optional not needed > > > v7: > > > - change lockstep-mode to xlnx,cluster-mode > > > v9: > > > - show example IPC nodes and tcm bank nodes > > > v11: > > > - add property meta-memory-regions to illustrate link > > > between r5 and TCM banks > > > - update so no warnings from 'make dt_binding_check' > > > v14: > > > - concerns were raised about the new property meta-memory-regions. > > > There is no clear direction so for the moment I kept it in the seri= es > > > - place IPC nodes in RAM in the reserved memory section > > > v15: > > > - change lockstep-mode prop as follows: if present, then RPU cluster = is in > > > lockstep mode. if not present, cluster is in split mode. > > > --- > > > .../xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc.yaml | 120 ++++++++++++++++= ++ > > > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynq= mp- > > r5-remoteproc.yaml > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..ce02e425692e > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > > > +%YAML 1.2 > > > +--- > > > +$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml#" > > > +$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#" > > > + > > > +title: Xilinx R5 remote processor controller bindings > > > + > > > +description: > > > + This document defines the binding for the remoteproc component tha= t > > loads and > > > + boots firmwares on the Xilinx Zynqmp and Versal family chipset. > > > + > > > + Note that the Linux has global addressing view of the R5-related m= emory > > (TCM) > > > + so the absolute address ranges are provided in TCM reg's. > > > > blank line needed. > > > will fix in next rev. > > TCMs specifically I'm concerned about how they are represented in syste= m > > DT and here... > > > So System DT can tie in with lopper plugin/assists so that TCMs are outpu= t to whatever the linux driver expects. Sorry, I don't buy lopper can handle it. That leaves too much hand waving I= MO. > > > +maintainers: > > > + - Ed Mooring > > > + - Ben Levinsky > > > + > > > +properties: > > > + compatible: > > > + const: "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0" > > > > Don't need quotes. > > > will fix in next rev. > > The use of version numbers was allowed for Xilinx programmable IP. I > > don't think this falls into that category. > > > will fix in next rev. > > > + > > > + lockstep-mode: > > > + description: > > > + If this property is present, then the configuration is lock-st= ep. > > > > boolean... > > > By this comment do you mean you want this to change or mention that it is= implicitly Boolean? You defining this as a boolean and then using a schema that applies to arrays (maxItems). > > > + Otherwise RPU is split. > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > ...or an array? > > > > Either way, doesn't work for TI R5. > > > So as the configuration for both the TI R5 and Xilinx R5 is independent w= hat in common would you like to see here? > For example Xilinx driver can similarly have the "Xilinx,cluster-mode" or= "cluster-mode" but for Xilinx platform manager our split configuration val= ue in Xilinx platform manager is '0' while in TI drver it is '1'. So I can = make the driver expect it then translate if needed if this what you prefer. What's Xilinx platform manager? The drivers are irrelevant for the binding. > > Otherwise how would you suggest the Xilinx r5 remoteproc driver describe= split/lockstep mode? For what's clearly the same functionality, I want the binding the same. TI can have more modes if that's what they need. > > > + > > > + interrupts: > > > + description: > > > + Interrupt mapping for remoteproc IPI. It is required if the > > > + user uses the remoteproc driver with the RPMsg kernel driver. > > > + maxItems: 6 > > > + > > > + memory-region: > > > + description: > > > + collection of memory carveouts used for elf-loading and inter-= processor > > > + communication. > > > + maxItems: 4 > > > + minItems: 4 > > > > Need to define what each region is. > > > > One blank line between properties. > > > will fix in next rev. for memory-regions is the following ok? > collection of phandles for memory carveouts for elf-loading and > inter-processor communication. > > This collection can consist of reserved-mem carveouts in DDR. No. items: - description: This is the 1st entry... - description: This is the 2nd entry... ... > > > > + meta-memory-regions: > > > + description: > > > + collection of memories that are not present in the top level m= emory > > > + nodes' mapping. For example, R5s' TCM banks. These banks are n= eeded > > > + for R5 firmware meta data such as the R5 firmware's heap and s= tack > > > > Humm, needs a better explanation. > How is the following: > Collection of phandles for reserved on-chip SRAM regions. > > > Otherwise I can get rid of this property and combine into memory-region i= f you wish. Not sure really. > > > + pnode-id: > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > What's this? > > > Can add the following: > power node id that is used to uniquely identify the RPU for Xilinx > Power Management. The value is then passed to Xilinx platform > manager for power on/off and access. Sounds like you should be using the power-domain binding. > > > + mboxes: > > > + maxItems: 2 > > > > Need to define what each one is. > > > How is the following: > array of phandles that describe the rx and tx for xilinx zynqmp > mailbox driver. order of rx and tx is described by the mbox-names > property. This will be used for communication with remote > processor. > > > + mbox-names: > > > + maxItems: 2 > > > > Need to define the names. > > > How is the following: > array of strings that denote which item in the mboxes property array > are the rx and tx for xilinx zynqmp mailbox driver Terrible. We have a schema to define constraints. items: - const: rx - const: tx > > > + > > > +examples: > > > + - | > > > + reserved-memory { > > > + #address-cells =3D <1>; > > > + #size-cells =3D <1>; > > > + ranges; > > > + elf_load: rproc@3ed000000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg =3D <0x3ed00000 0x40000>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + rpu0vdev0vring0: rpu0vdev0vring0@3ed40000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg =3D <0x3ed40000 0x4000>; > > > + }; > > > + rpu0vdev0vring1: rpu0vdev0vring1@3ed44000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg =3D <0x3ed44000 0x4000>; > > > + }; > > > + rpu0vdev0buffer: rpu0vdev0buffer@3ed48000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg =3D <0x3ed48000 0x100000>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + }; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Below nodes are required if using TCM to load R5 firmware > > > + * if not, then either do not provide nodes are label as disabl= ed in > > > + * status property > > > + */ > > > + tcm0a: tcm_0a@ffe00000 { > > > + reg =3D <0xffe00000 0x10000>; > > > + pnode-id =3D <0xf>; > > > + no-map; > > > + status =3D "okay"; > > > + phandle =3D <0x40>; > > > + compatible =3D "xlnx,tcm"; > > > > TCM is a Xilinx specific thing? > > > No... good point. Can remove the compatible string in next rev. Well, it should probably have some sort of compatible so we know what the thing is... If we have a DT for the R5 side or view of the system, we'd need to define TCMs, right? For the A cores, it shouldn't look any different other than perhaps the address. So, you first need a TCM binding. Maybe that ends up being just mmio-sram binding, maybe not. Probably not if there's power controls. > > > + }; > > > + tcm0b: tcm_1a@ffe20000 { > > > + reg =3D <0xffe20000 0x10000>; > > > + pnode-id =3D <0x10>; > > > + no-map; > > > + status =3D "okay"; > > > + compatible =3D "xlnx,tcm"; > > > + phandle =3D <0x41>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + rpu { > > > + compatible =3D "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0"; > > > + #address-cells =3D <1>; > > > + #size-cells =3D <1>; > > > + ranges; > > > + lockstep-mode; > > > + r5_0 { > > > + ranges; > > > + #address-cells =3D <1>; > > > + #size-cells =3D <1>; > > > + memory-region =3D <&elf_load>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0vring0>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0vring1>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0buffer>; > > > + meta-memory-regions =3D <&tcm_0a>, <&tcm_0b>; > > > + pnode-id =3D <0x7>; > > > + }; > > > + }; > > > + > > > +... > > > -- > > > 2.17.1 > > > > Thank you, > Ben > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8304EC388F7 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D674D20704 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:43:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="qysjwvzV"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="mQy6h2uw" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D674D20704 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:From:In-Reply-To: References:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=soYXxs8T+KGCHxX/PAYWBrXGoExWtV7t7bSKs+8+ex8=; b=qysjwvzVVQ3zfDViJH2FkuYS1 OKzcybiB4EgeuF13cL6ibRIEKRd3AwhsdT957BUdsWhNA5Iv7YNkPxrN/kZ5Hb9bHr+YxykzUPuBh aav8ONxrW83jNlBeqUhRQFjL+uWXiMYcosqC+UGmHYQRCrQw+Hm3CY6S1pKm6kWFzM9rVqA+S6+/k xp8JeruNmySqnNJ5n2ICNkNrgz7bV/5KSGBkM/jTzNZKmdT9y9tcbc/c/jBqtumIqOPmwOwBYrb+l 2COvCC8MvWIkSQAKfqSY+QwpYx0ZUpuILjprmlOkh3Is6SNuzr+H6BRIsXXAZU7pYgH2zsivJu4cb EtDdHUqFw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kal9E-0002O1-IF; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 19:42:16 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kal9C-0002NZ-EN for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 19:42:15 +0000 Received: from mail-ot1-f46.google.com (mail-ot1-f46.google.com [209.85.210.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F7082087D for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:42:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1604605333; bh=2f8uBDBd6vZ1Bi+z6mfdu/D7TFmbVBfMJ95MTlLW1M0=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=mQy6h2uw/FOfqG3jyuJJ0aIBcbjDQD9uwYzHzFpYvQ9QUBDBcIb+nl32FahOi0r// TxiWznPhi/PuNKfqYXqiP8n3W7yZw9yKQof72L2eLa8SG5zMyHPkuJ9w2UuC5k51Az eWWlonNS/Yo4HCK5uM4DY4bLJPMImlSrlLx/biAs= Received: by mail-ot1-f46.google.com with SMTP id g19so2519464otp.13 for ; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:42:13 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533pZHzN6UY0H0PSyr1HRy60+hHBFa0lrcs+udbKfoEwCew1S7Dm /OlRvYlS4ZmP/Q87b4J6uFWe3rYdAnFal1pOug== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+z0PQIDRqCFUJ6autn65Xzx2Zcq1tqbTGIqs3u22M5W508faJrZaTDa86EG65WOHy4dXQ/zi8XYANvzKPXck= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5e14:: with SMTP id d20mr2606861oti.107.1604605332504; Thu, 05 Nov 2020 11:42:12 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200922223930.4710-1-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> <20200922223930.4710-5-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> <20200929183601.GA892636@bogus> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Herring Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:42:01 -0600 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings To: Ben Levinsky X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201105_144214_665893_76810552 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 55.81 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Stefano Stabellini , "Ed T. Mooring" , "michael.auchter@ni.com" , "mathieu.poirier@linaro.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jiaying Liang , Michal Simek , Jason Wu , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 11:21 AM Ben Levinsky wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Herring > > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 11:36 AM > > To: Ben Levinsky > > Cc: Stefano Stabellini ; Michal Simek > > ; michael.auchter@ni.com; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; > > mathieu.poirier@linaro.org; Ed T. Mooring ; linux- > > remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- > > kernel@lists.infradead.org; Jason Wu ; Jiaying Liang > > ; Michal Simek > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for > > ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 03:39:29PM -0700, Ben Levinsky wrote: > > > Add binding for ZynqMP R5 OpenAMP. > > > > > > Represent the RPU domain resources in one device node. Each RPU > > > processor is a subnode of the top RPU domain node. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wu > > > Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky > > > --- > > > v3: > > > - update zynqmp_r5 yaml parsing to not raise warnings for extra > > > information in children of R5 node. The warning "node has a unit > > > name, but no reg or ranges property" will still be raised though > > > as this particular node is needed to describe the > > > '#address-cells' and '#size-cells' information. > > > v4:: > > > - remove warning '/example-0/rpu@ff9a0000/r5@0: > > > node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property' > > > by adding reg to r5 node. > > > v5: > > > - update device tree sample and yaml parsing to not raise any warnings > > > - description for memory-region in yaml parsing > > > - compatible string in yaml parsing for TCM > > > v6: > > > - remove coupling TCM nodes with remoteproc > > > - remove mailbox as it is optional not needed > > > v7: > > > - change lockstep-mode to xlnx,cluster-mode > > > v9: > > > - show example IPC nodes and tcm bank nodes > > > v11: > > > - add property meta-memory-regions to illustrate link > > > between r5 and TCM banks > > > - update so no warnings from 'make dt_binding_check' > > > v14: > > > - concerns were raised about the new property meta-memory-regions. > > > There is no clear direction so for the moment I kept it in the series > > > - place IPC nodes in RAM in the reserved memory section > > > v15: > > > - change lockstep-mode prop as follows: if present, then RPU cluster is in > > > lockstep mode. if not present, cluster is in split mode. > > > --- > > > .../xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc.yaml | 120 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp- > > r5-remoteproc.yaml > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..ce02e425692e > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml > > > @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > > > +%YAML 1.2 > > > +--- > > > +$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5- > > remoteproc.yaml#" > > > +$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#" > > > + > > > +title: Xilinx R5 remote processor controller bindings > > > + > > > +description: > > > + This document defines the binding for the remoteproc component that > > loads and > > > + boots firmwares on the Xilinx Zynqmp and Versal family chipset. > > > + > > > + Note that the Linux has global addressing view of the R5-related memory > > (TCM) > > > + so the absolute address ranges are provided in TCM reg's. > > > > blank line needed. > > > will fix in next rev. > > TCMs specifically I'm concerned about how they are represented in system > > DT and here... > > > So System DT can tie in with lopper plugin/assists so that TCMs are output to whatever the linux driver expects. Sorry, I don't buy lopper can handle it. That leaves too much hand waving IMO. > > > +maintainers: > > > + - Ed Mooring > > > + - Ben Levinsky > > > + > > > +properties: > > > + compatible: > > > + const: "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0" > > > > Don't need quotes. > > > will fix in next rev. > > The use of version numbers was allowed for Xilinx programmable IP. I > > don't think this falls into that category. > > > will fix in next rev. > > > + > > > + lockstep-mode: > > > + description: > > > + If this property is present, then the configuration is lock-step. > > > > boolean... > > > By this comment do you mean you want this to change or mention that it is implicitly Boolean? You defining this as a boolean and then using a schema that applies to arrays (maxItems). > > > + Otherwise RPU is split. > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > ...or an array? > > > > Either way, doesn't work for TI R5. > > > So as the configuration for both the TI R5 and Xilinx R5 is independent what in common would you like to see here? > For example Xilinx driver can similarly have the "Xilinx,cluster-mode" or "cluster-mode" but for Xilinx platform manager our split configuration value in Xilinx platform manager is '0' while in TI drver it is '1'. So I can make the driver expect it then translate if needed if this what you prefer. What's Xilinx platform manager? The drivers are irrelevant for the binding. > > Otherwise how would you suggest the Xilinx r5 remoteproc driver describe split/lockstep mode? For what's clearly the same functionality, I want the binding the same. TI can have more modes if that's what they need. > > > + > > > + interrupts: > > > + description: > > > + Interrupt mapping for remoteproc IPI. It is required if the > > > + user uses the remoteproc driver with the RPMsg kernel driver. > > > + maxItems: 6 > > > + > > > + memory-region: > > > + description: > > > + collection of memory carveouts used for elf-loading and inter-processor > > > + communication. > > > + maxItems: 4 > > > + minItems: 4 > > > > Need to define what each region is. > > > > One blank line between properties. > > > will fix in next rev. for memory-regions is the following ok? > collection of phandles for memory carveouts for elf-loading and > inter-processor communication. > > This collection can consist of reserved-mem carveouts in DDR. No. items: - description: This is the 1st entry... - description: This is the 2nd entry... ... > > > > + meta-memory-regions: > > > + description: > > > + collection of memories that are not present in the top level memory > > > + nodes' mapping. For example, R5s' TCM banks. These banks are needed > > > + for R5 firmware meta data such as the R5 firmware's heap and stack > > > > Humm, needs a better explanation. > How is the following: > Collection of phandles for reserved on-chip SRAM regions. > > > Otherwise I can get rid of this property and combine into memory-region if you wish. Not sure really. > > > + pnode-id: > > > + maxItems: 1 > > > > What's this? > > > Can add the following: > power node id that is used to uniquely identify the RPU for Xilinx > Power Management. The value is then passed to Xilinx platform > manager for power on/off and access. Sounds like you should be using the power-domain binding. > > > + mboxes: > > > + maxItems: 2 > > > > Need to define what each one is. > > > How is the following: > array of phandles that describe the rx and tx for xilinx zynqmp > mailbox driver. order of rx and tx is described by the mbox-names > property. This will be used for communication with remote > processor. > > > + mbox-names: > > > + maxItems: 2 > > > > Need to define the names. > > > How is the following: > array of strings that denote which item in the mboxes property array > are the rx and tx for xilinx zynqmp mailbox driver Terrible. We have a schema to define constraints. items: - const: rx - const: tx > > > + > > > +examples: > > > + - | > > > + reserved-memory { > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + ranges; > > > + elf_load: rproc@3ed000000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed00000 0x40000>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + rpu0vdev0vring0: rpu0vdev0vring0@3ed40000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed40000 0x4000>; > > > + }; > > > + rpu0vdev0vring1: rpu0vdev0vring1@3ed44000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed44000 0x4000>; > > > + }; > > > + rpu0vdev0buffer: rpu0vdev0buffer@3ed48000 { > > > + no-map; > > > + reg = <0x3ed48000 0x100000>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + }; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Below nodes are required if using TCM to load R5 firmware > > > + * if not, then either do not provide nodes are label as disabled in > > > + * status property > > > + */ > > > + tcm0a: tcm_0a@ffe00000 { > > > + reg = <0xffe00000 0x10000>; > > > + pnode-id = <0xf>; > > > + no-map; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > + phandle = <0x40>; > > > + compatible = "xlnx,tcm"; > > > > TCM is a Xilinx specific thing? > > > No... good point. Can remove the compatible string in next rev. Well, it should probably have some sort of compatible so we know what the thing is... If we have a DT for the R5 side or view of the system, we'd need to define TCMs, right? For the A cores, it shouldn't look any different other than perhaps the address. So, you first need a TCM binding. Maybe that ends up being just mmio-sram binding, maybe not. Probably not if there's power controls. > > > + }; > > > + tcm0b: tcm_1a@ffe20000 { > > > + reg = <0xffe20000 0x10000>; > > > + pnode-id = <0x10>; > > > + no-map; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > + compatible = "xlnx,tcm"; > > > + phandle = <0x41>; > > > + }; > > > + > > > + rpu { > > > + compatible = "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0"; > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + ranges; > > > + lockstep-mode; > > > + r5_0 { > > > + ranges; > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + memory-region = <&elf_load>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0vring0>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0vring1>, > > > + <&rpu0vdev0buffer>; > > > + meta-memory-regions = <&tcm_0a>, <&tcm_0b>; > > > + pnode-id = <0x7>; > > > + }; > > > + }; > > > + > > > +... > > > -- > > > 2.17.1 > > > > Thank you, > Ben > > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel