[PATCH v6 0/2] arm64: dts: Add sdm845 GPU/GMU and SMMU

[PATCH v6 0/2] arm64: dts: Add sdm845 GPU/GMU and SMMU

[Jordan Crouse]

Now that more of the sdm845 bindings are headed upstream this a refresh of
of https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/39308/ to add bindings and nodes
for the GPU/GMU and GPU SMMU for sdm845.

This is based on :
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/agross/linux.git for-next

with:
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1018365/

This change requires the following dependencies:

include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10711119/

qcom,smmu-v2 binding:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10581911/

v6: Update GPU bindings for a6xx and make the examples match the nodes and vice
 versa.  Clean up types and rebase on
 https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1018365/ to help facilitate merging.
v5: Use symbolic names for the RPMH power levels defined in OPP table,
 move the opp tables as children of their respective nodes and rename
 the iommu device.
v4: Rebase
v3: Split GMU PDC region into two GPU specific sections, fix indentation,
  really use qcom,gmu for the phandle name
v2: changed qcom,arc-level to qcom,level following discussion with Viresh;
  change gmu phandle to qcom,gmu per Rob

*** BLURB HERE ***

Jordan Crouse (2):
  dt-bindings: drm/msm/a6xx: Document GMU and update GPU bindings
  arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

 .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt   |  56 ++++++++
 .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt   |  41 +++++-
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi          | 123 ++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 217 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt

-- 
2.18.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: drm/msm/a6xx: Document GMU and update GPU bindings

[Jordan Crouse]

Update the GPU bindings and document the new bindings for the GMU
device found with Adreno a6xx targets.

Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt   | 56 +++++++++++++++++++
 .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt   | 41 +++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..6152cb551d29
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+Qualcomm adreno/snapdragon GMU (Graphics management unit)
+
+The GMU is a programmable power controller for the GPU. the CPU controls the
+GMU which in turn handles power controls for the GPU.
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible:
+  * "qcom,adreno-gmu"
+- reg: Physical base address and length of the GMU registers.
+- reg-names: Matching names for the register regions
+  * "gmu"
+  * "gmu_pdc"
+  * "gmu_pdc_seg"
+- interrupts: The interrupt signals from the GMU.
+- interrupt-names: Matching names for the interrupts
+  * "hfi"
+  * "gmu"
+- clocks: phandles to the device clocks
+- clock-names: Matching names for the clocks
+   * "gmu"
+   * "cxo"
+   * "axi"
+   * "mnoc"
+- power-domains: should be <&clock_gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>
+- iommus: phandle to the adreno iommu
+- operating-points-v2: phandle to the OPP operating points
+
+Example:
+
+/ {
+	...
+
+	gmu: gmu@506a000 {
+		compatible="qcom,adreno-gmu";
+
+		reg = <0x506a000 0x30000>,
+			<0xb280000 0x10000>,
+			<0xb480000 0x10000>;
+		reg-names = "gmu", "gmu_pdc", "gmu_pdc_seq";
+
+		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 304 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+		     <GIC_SPI 305 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+		interrupt-names = "hfi", "gmu";
+
+		clocks = <&gpucc GPU_CC_CX_GMU_CLK>,
+			<&gpucc GPU_CC_CXO_CLK>,
+			<&gcc GCC_DDRSS_GPU_AXI_CLK>,
+			<&gcc GCC_GPU_MEMNOC_GFX_CLK>;
+		clock-names = "gmu", "cxo", "axi", "memnoc";
+
+		power-domains = <&gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>;
+		iommus = <&adreno_smmu 5>;
+
+		operating-points-v2 = <&gmu_opp_table>;
+	};
+};
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
index 43fac0fe09bb..8d9415180c22 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
@@ -8,14 +8,21 @@ Required properties:
   with the chip-id.
 - reg: Physical base address and length of the controller's registers.
 - interrupts: The interrupt signal from the gpu.
-- clocks: device clocks
+- interrupt-names: List of names for the interrupt signals. The following can be
+  provided:
+  * "kgsl_3d0_irq"
+- clocks: device clocks (if applicable)
   See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details.
-- clock-names: the following clocks are required:
+- clock-names: the following clocks can be provided:
   * "core"
   * "iface"
   * "mem_iface"
+- iommus: optional phandle to an adreno iommu instance
+- operating-points-v2: optional phandle to the OPP operating points
+- qcom,gmu: For a6xx and newer targets a phandle to the GMU device that will
+  control the power for the GPU
 
-Example:
+Example 3xx/4xx/a5xx:
 
 / {
 	...
@@ -36,3 +43,31 @@ Example:
 		    <&mmcc MMSS_IMEM_AHB_CLK>;
 	};
 };
+
+Example a6xx (with GMU):
+
+/ {
+	...
+
+	gpu@5000000 {
+		compatible = "qcom,adreno-630.2", "qcom,adreno";
+		#stream-id-cells = <16>;
+
+		reg = <0x5000000 0x40000>, <0x509e000 0x10>;
+		reg-names = "kgsl_3d0_reg_memory", "cx_mem";
+
+		/*
+		 * Look ma, no clocks! The GPU clocks and power are
+		 * controlled entirely by the GMU
+		 */
+
+		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 300 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+		interrupt-names = "kgsl_3d0_irq";
+
+		iommus = <&adreno_smmu 0>;
+
+		operating-points-v2 = <&gpu_opp_table>;
+
+		qcom,gmu = <&gmu>;
+	};
+};
-- 
2.18.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Jordan Crouse]

Add the nodes to describe the Adreno GPU and GMU devices.

Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
index 233a5898ebc2..a608afed502e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
 #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/phy/phy-qcom-qusb2.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/reset/qcom,sdm845-aoss.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-sdm845.h>
@@ -1349,6 +1350,128 @@
 			};
 		};
 
+
+		gpu@5000000 {
+			compatible = "qcom,adreno-630.2", "qcom,adreno";
+			#stream-id-cells = <16>;
+
+			reg = <0x5000000 0x40000>, <0x509e000 0x10>;
+			reg-names = "kgsl_3d0_reg_memory", "cx_mem";
+
+			/*
+			 * Look ma, no clocks! The GPU clocks and power are
+			 * controlled entirely by the GMU
+			 */
+
+			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 300 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+			interrupt-names = "kgsl_3d0_irq";
+
+			iommus = <&adreno_smmu 0>;
+
+			operating-points-v2 = <&gpu_opp_table>;
+
+			qcom,gmu = <&gmu>;
+
+			gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
+				compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
+
+				opp-710000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
+				};
+
+				opp-675000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <675000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO>;
+				};
+
+				opp-596000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <596000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_NOM_L1>;
+				};
+
+				opp-520000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <520000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_NOM>;
+				};
+
+				opp-414000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <414000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_SVS_L1>;
+				};
+
+				opp-342000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <342000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_SVS>;
+				};
+
+				opp-257000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <257000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_LOW_SVS>;
+				};
+			};
+		};
+
+		adreno_smmu: iommu@5040000 {
+			compatible = "qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2";
+			reg = <0x5040000 0x10000>;
+			#iommu-cells = <1>;
+			#global-interrupts = <2>;
+			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 229 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+					<GIC_SPI 231 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+					<GIC_SPI 364 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 365 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 366 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 367 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 368 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 369 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 370 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
+					<GIC_SPI 371 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+			clocks = <&gcc GCC_GPU_MEMNOC_GFX_CLK>,
+				<&gcc GCC_GPU_CFG_AHB_CLK>;
+			clock-names = "bus", "iface";
+
+			power-domains = <&gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>;
+		};
+
+		gmu: gmu@506a000 {
+			compatible="qcom,adreno-gmu";
+
+			reg = <0x506a000 0x30000>,
+				<0xb280000 0x10000>,
+				<0xb480000 0x10000>;
+			reg-names = "gmu", "gmu_pdc", "gmu_pdc_seq";
+
+			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 304 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+			     <GIC_SPI 305 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+			interrupt-names = "hfi", "gmu";
+
+			clocks = <&gpucc GPU_CC_CX_GMU_CLK>,
+				<&gpucc GPU_CC_CXO_CLK>,
+				<&gcc GCC_DDRSS_GPU_AXI_CLK>,
+				<&gcc GCC_GPU_MEMNOC_GFX_CLK>;
+			clock-names = "gmu", "cxo", "axi", "memnoc";
+
+			power-domains = <&gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>;
+			iommus = <&adreno_smmu 5>;
+
+			operating-points-v2 = <&gmu_opp_table>;
+
+			gmu_opp_table: opp-table {
+				compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
+
+				opp-400000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <400000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_SVS>;
+				};
+
+				opp-200000000 {
+					opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <200000000>;
+					qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_MIN_SVS>;
+				};
+			};
+		};
+
 		gpucc: clock-controller@5090000 {
 			compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpucc";
 			reg = <0x5090000 0x9000>;
-- 
2.18.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: drm/msm/a6xx: Document GMU and update GPU bindings

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 1:18 PM Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> index 43fac0fe09bb..8d9415180c22 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> @@ -8,14 +8,21 @@ Required properties:
>    with the chip-id.
>  - reg: Physical base address and length of the controller's registers.
>  - interrupts: The interrupt signal from the gpu.
> -- clocks: device clocks
> +- interrupt-names: List of names for the interrupt signals. The following can be
> +  provided:
> +  * "kgsl_3d0_irq"
> +- clocks: device clocks (if applicable)
>    See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details.
> -- clock-names: the following clocks are required:
> +- clock-names: the following clocks can be provided:
>    * "core"
>    * "iface"
>    * "mem_iface"
> +- iommus: optional phandle to an adreno iommu instance
> +- operating-points-v2: optional phandle to the OPP operating points
> +- qcom,gmu: For a6xx and newer targets a phandle to the GMU device that will
> +  control the power for the GPU

Seems fine to me.  If you happen to spin it again for some other
reason it might be nice to be more explicit about exactly when clocks
are required and when they aren't.   IIUC they are always required on
systems without a GMU and they are never present on systems with a
GMU.  ...but I wouldn't spin it just for that.

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 1:18 PM Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> Add the nodes to describe the Adreno GPU and GMU devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> index 233a5898ebc2..a608afed502e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
>  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h>
>  #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>  #include <dt-bindings/phy/phy-qcom-qusb2.h>
> +#include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h>
>  #include <dt-bindings/reset/qcom,sdm845-aoss.h>
>  #include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
>  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-sdm845.h>
> @@ -1349,6 +1350,128 @@
>                         };
>                 };
>
> +
> +               gpu@5000000 {

nit that you're adding an extra blank line here that you don't need.
Given the quantity of outstanding dts patches though, it's almost
certain that Andy will need to manually resolve conflicts when
applying this patch so presumably he can fix up when he lands.

In any case, feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>

-Doug

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Viresh Kumar]

On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> +			gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> +				compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";

I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.

-- 
viresh

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:41 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > +                     gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> > +                             compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
>
> I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.

Are you saying the above should be:
  compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";

If so I'm not sure I agree.  It's _not_ really compatible with the
"operating-points-v2" binding.  If you had a driver that had never
heard of "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and had only heard of
"operating-points-v2" and it took a look at this node it would have no
idea what to do with it.

I'll also note that other instances posted to the list don't list both:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725801/ - RPM / RPMH PD bindings
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/ - RPMH PD device tree for sdm845

The bindings patch also makes no mention of needing
"operating-points-v2".  I think the common case when a fallback is
required it is explicitly called out in the bindings:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725803/ - qcom-opp bindings


-Doug

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Viresh Kumar]

+Rob +Stephen,

On 14-12-18, 09:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:41 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > > +                     gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> > > +                             compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> >
> > I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.
> 
> Are you saying the above should be:
>   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> 
> If so I'm not sure I agree.

Well I have my doubts as well on this. This is where the ordering was discussed
earlier:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/152328979897.180276.15963925877442657158@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com/

@Rob/Stephen: Should the opp-table node above also have "operating-points-v2"
string in the compatible property ?

> It's _not_ really compatible with the
> "operating-points-v2" binding.  If you had a driver that had never
> heard of "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and had only heard of
> "operating-points-v2" and it took a look at this node it would have no
> idea what to do with it.

Well it will parse everything apart from the qcom,level thing, so it can
actually parse stuff here.

> I'll also note that other instances posted to the list don't list both:
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725801/ - RPM / RPMH PD bindings
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/ - RPMH PD device tree for sdm845
> 
> The bindings patch also makes no mention of needing
> "operating-points-v2".  I think the common case when a fallback is
> required it is explicitly called out in the bindings:
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725803/ - qcom-opp bindings

Sure, maybe I am wrong but its better to get some clarity on it from Rob/Stephen.

-- 
viresh

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: drm/msm/a6xx: Document GMU and update GPU bindings

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 02:18:47PM -0700, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> Update the GPU bindings and document the new bindings for the GMU
> device found with Adreno a6xx targets.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt   | 56 +++++++++++++++++++
>  .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt   | 41 +++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..6152cb551d29
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
> +Qualcomm adreno/snapdragon GMU (Graphics management unit)
> +
> +The GMU is a programmable power controller for the GPU. the CPU controls the
> +GMU which in turn handles power controls for the GPU.
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible:
> +  * "qcom,adreno-gmu"

I probably asked before, but this needs a specific compatible unless you 
have reliable version/capability registers. If you do, please state that 
here.

> +- reg: Physical base address and length of the GMU registers.
> +- reg-names: Matching names for the register regions
> +  * "gmu"
> +  * "gmu_pdc"
> +  * "gmu_pdc_seg"
> +- interrupts: The interrupt signals from the GMU.
> +- interrupt-names: Matching names for the interrupts
> +  * "hfi"
> +  * "gmu"
> +- clocks: phandles to the device clocks
> +- clock-names: Matching names for the clocks
> +   * "gmu"
> +   * "cxo"
> +   * "axi"
> +   * "mnoc"
> +- power-domains: should be <&clock_gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>
> +- iommus: phandle to the adreno iommu
> +- operating-points-v2: phandle to the OPP operating points
> +
> +Example:
> +
> +/ {
> +	...
> +
> +	gmu: gmu@506a000 {
> +		compatible="qcom,adreno-gmu";
> +
> +		reg = <0x506a000 0x30000>,
> +			<0xb280000 0x10000>,
> +			<0xb480000 0x10000>;
> +		reg-names = "gmu", "gmu_pdc", "gmu_pdc_seq";
> +
> +		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 304 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> +		     <GIC_SPI 305 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> +		interrupt-names = "hfi", "gmu";
> +
> +		clocks = <&gpucc GPU_CC_CX_GMU_CLK>,
> +			<&gpucc GPU_CC_CXO_CLK>,
> +			<&gcc GCC_DDRSS_GPU_AXI_CLK>,
> +			<&gcc GCC_GPU_MEMNOC_GFX_CLK>;
> +		clock-names = "gmu", "cxo", "axi", "memnoc";
> +
> +		power-domains = <&gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>;
> +		iommus = <&adreno_smmu 5>;
> +
> +		operating-points-v2 = <&gmu_opp_table>;
> +	};
> +};
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> index 43fac0fe09bb..8d9415180c22 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> @@ -8,14 +8,21 @@ Required properties:
>    with the chip-id.
>  - reg: Physical base address and length of the controller's registers.
>  - interrupts: The interrupt signal from the gpu.
> -- clocks: device clocks
> +- interrupt-names: List of names for the interrupt signals. The following can be
> +  provided:
> +  * "kgsl_3d0_irq"

I'm pretty sure 'kgsl' is not a hardware thing. You don't need *-names 
when there is only one of something.

> +- clocks: device clocks (if applicable)

What does this mean? They are now optional? If so, move to an "Optional" 
section. Likewise for the others.

Really, you should add a new compatible so we can validate when clocks 
not being present is valid vs. an error in the DT.

>    See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details.
> -- clock-names: the following clocks are required:
> +- clock-names: the following clocks can be provided:
>    * "core"
>    * "iface"
>    * "mem_iface"
> +- iommus: optional phandle to an adreno iommu instance
> +- operating-points-v2: optional phandle to the OPP operating points
> +- qcom,gmu: For a6xx and newer targets a phandle to the GMU device that will
> +  control the power for the GPU

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: drm/msm/a6xx: Document GMU and update GPU bindings

[Jordan Crouse]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 03:20:10PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 02:18:47PM -0700, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > Update the GPU bindings and document the new bindings for the GMU
> > device found with Adreno a6xx targets.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
> > ---
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt   | 56 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt   | 41 +++++++++++++-
> >  2 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..6152cb551d29
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gmu.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
> > +Qualcomm adreno/snapdragon GMU (Graphics management unit)
> > +
> > +The GMU is a programmable power controller for the GPU. the CPU controls the
> > +GMU which in turn handles power controls for the GPU.
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible:
> > +  * "qcom,adreno-gmu"
> 
> I probably asked before, but this needs a specific compatible unless you 
> have reliable version/capability registers. If you do, please state that 
> here.

Most of our decisions are made based on the type of GPU attached but it wouldn't
hurt to make this future proof.  I'll do it.

> > +- reg: Physical base address and length of the GMU registers.
> > +- reg-names: Matching names for the register regions
> > +  * "gmu"
> > +  * "gmu_pdc"
> > +  * "gmu_pdc_seg"
> > +- interrupts: The interrupt signals from the GMU.
> > +- interrupt-names: Matching names for the interrupts
> > +  * "hfi"
> > +  * "gmu"
> > +- clocks: phandles to the device clocks
> > +- clock-names: Matching names for the clocks
> > +   * "gmu"
> > +   * "cxo"
> > +   * "axi"
> > +   * "mnoc"
> > +- power-domains: should be <&clock_gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>
> > +- iommus: phandle to the adreno iommu
> > +- operating-points-v2: phandle to the OPP operating points
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > +/ {
> > +	...
> > +
> > +	gmu: gmu@506a000 {
> > +		compatible="qcom,adreno-gmu";
> > +
> > +		reg = <0x506a000 0x30000>,
> > +			<0xb280000 0x10000>,
> > +			<0xb480000 0x10000>;
> > +		reg-names = "gmu", "gmu_pdc", "gmu_pdc_seq";
> > +
> > +		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 304 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > +		     <GIC_SPI 305 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > +		interrupt-names = "hfi", "gmu";
> > +
> > +		clocks = <&gpucc GPU_CC_CX_GMU_CLK>,
> > +			<&gpucc GPU_CC_CXO_CLK>,
> > +			<&gcc GCC_DDRSS_GPU_AXI_CLK>,
> > +			<&gcc GCC_GPU_MEMNOC_GFX_CLK>;
> > +		clock-names = "gmu", "cxo", "axi", "memnoc";
> > +
> > +		power-domains = <&gpucc GPU_CX_GDSC>;
> > +		iommus = <&adreno_smmu 5>;
> > +
> > +		operating-points-v2 = <&gmu_opp_table>;
> > +	};
> > +};
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> > index 43fac0fe09bb..8d9415180c22 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/gpu.txt
> > @@ -8,14 +8,21 @@ Required properties:
> >    with the chip-id.
> >  - reg: Physical base address and length of the controller's registers.
> >  - interrupts: The interrupt signal from the gpu.
> > -- clocks: device clocks
> > +- interrupt-names: List of names for the interrupt signals. The following can be
> > +  provided:
> > +  * "kgsl_3d0_irq"
> 
> I'm pretty sure 'kgsl' is not a hardware thing. You don't need *-names 
> when there is only one of something.

This has mainly existed just for compatibility issues.  We do only have the one
interrupt so lets zap the downstream name and never look back.

> > +- clocks: device clocks (if applicable)
> 
> What does this mean? They are now optional? If so, move to an "Optional" 
> section. Likewise for the others.

They are indeed optional now.

> Really, you should add a new compatible so we can validate when clocks 
> not being present is valid vs. an error in the DT.

We could use the GPU revision for that, but our approach has been to make all
clocks optional for all targets.  Eventually when we go to power up if the GPU
core ends up needing a clock and it isn't defined we fail probe at that point.
I'm not sure if that is resilient enough for DT purposes though.

Jordan

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:06 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> +Rob +Stephen,
>
> On 14-12-18, 09:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:41 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > > > +                     gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> > > > +                             compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > >
> > > I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.
> >
> > Are you saying the above should be:
> >   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> >
> > If so I'm not sure I agree.
>
> Well I have my doubts as well on this. This is where the ordering was discussed
> earlier:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/152328979897.180276.15963925877442657158@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com/
>
> @Rob/Stephen: Should the opp-table node above also have "operating-points-v2"
> string in the compatible property ?
>
> > It's _not_ really compatible with the
> > "operating-points-v2" binding.  If you had a driver that had never
> > heard of "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and had only heard of
> > "operating-points-v2" and it took a look at this node it would have no
> > idea what to do with it.
>
> Well it will parse everything apart from the qcom,level thing, so it can
> actually parse stuff here.
>
> > I'll also note that other instances posted to the list don't list both:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725801/ - RPM / RPMH PD bindings
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/ - RPMH PD device tree for sdm845
> >
> > The bindings patch also makes no mention of needing
> > "operating-points-v2".  I think the common case when a fallback is
> > required it is explicitly called out in the bindings:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725803/ - qcom-opp bindings
>
> Sure, maybe I am wrong but its better to get some clarity on it from Rob/Stephen.

In case it helps:

https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181217210849.GA15490@bogus

...shows Rob giving a Reviewed-by with just

  compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";

...and not:

  compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";


-Doug

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Doug Anderson (2018-12-17 16:34:31)
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:06 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > +Rob +Stephen,
> >
> > On 14-12-18, 09:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:41 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > > > > +                     gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> > > > > +                             compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > > >
> > > > I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.
> > >
> > > Are you saying the above should be:
> > >   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> > >
> > > If so I'm not sure I agree.
> >
> > Well I have my doubts as well on this. This is where the ordering was discussed
> > earlier:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/152328979897.180276.15963925877442657158@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com/
> >
> > @Rob/Stephen: Should the opp-table node above also have "operating-points-v2"
> > string in the compatible property ?
> >
> > > It's _not_ really compatible with the
> > > "operating-points-v2" binding.  If you had a driver that had never
> > > heard of "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and had only heard of
> > > "operating-points-v2" and it took a look at this node it would have no
> > > idea what to do with it.
> >
> > Well it will parse everything apart from the qcom,level thing, so it can
> > actually parse stuff here.
> >
> > > I'll also note that other instances posted to the list don't list both:
> > >
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725801/ - RPM / RPMH PD bindings
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/ - RPMH PD device tree for sdm845
> > >
> > > The bindings patch also makes no mention of needing
> > > "operating-points-v2".  I think the common case when a fallback is
> > > required it is explicitly called out in the bindings:
> > >
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725803/ - qcom-opp bindings
> >
> > Sure, maybe I am wrong but its better to get some clarity on it from Rob/Stephen.
> 
> In case it helps:
> 
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181217210849.GA15490@bogus
> 
> ...shows Rob giving a Reviewed-by with just
> 
>   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> 
> ...and not:
> 
>   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> 

I don't see a problem if both compatible strings are there. Does that
change anything? I suppose the platform bus populate code won't create a
device for the subnode if it has 'operating-points-v2', so maybe the
fallback compatible string should be there? And then the generic OPP
code can parse out the frequency at least without having to know that
it's a qcom specific OPP table.


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:40 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Doug Anderson (2018-12-17 16:34:31)
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:06 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > +Rob +Stephen,
> > >
> > > On 14-12-18, 09:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:41 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > > > > > +                     gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> > > > > > +                             compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > > > >
> > > > > I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.
> > > >
> > > > Are you saying the above should be:
> > > >   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> > > >
> > > > If so I'm not sure I agree.
> > >
> > > Well I have my doubts as well on this. This is where the ordering was discussed
> > > earlier:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/152328979897.180276.15963925877442657158@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com/
> > >
> > > @Rob/Stephen: Should the opp-table node above also have "operating-points-v2"
> > > string in the compatible property ?
> > >
> > > > It's _not_ really compatible with the
> > > > "operating-points-v2" binding.  If you had a driver that had never
> > > > heard of "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and had only heard of
> > > > "operating-points-v2" and it took a look at this node it would have no
> > > > idea what to do with it.
> > >
> > > Well it will parse everything apart from the qcom,level thing, so it can
> > > actually parse stuff here.
> > >
> > > > I'll also note that other instances posted to the list don't list both:
> > > >
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725801/ - RPM / RPMH PD bindings
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/ - RPMH PD device tree for sdm845
> > > >
> > > > The bindings patch also makes no mention of needing
> > > > "operating-points-v2".  I think the common case when a fallback is
> > > > required it is explicitly called out in the bindings:
> > > >
> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725803/ - qcom-opp bindings
> > >
> > > Sure, maybe I am wrong but its better to get some clarity on it from Rob/Stephen.
> >
> > In case it helps:
> >
> > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181217210849.GA15490@bogus
> >
> > ...shows Rob giving a Reviewed-by with just
> >
> >   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> >
> > ...and not:
> >
> >   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> >
>
> I don't see a problem if both compatible strings are there. Does that
> change anything? I suppose the platform bus populate code won't create a
> device for the subnode if it has 'operating-points-v2', so maybe the
> fallback compatible string should be there? And then the generic OPP
> code can parse out the frequency at least without having to know that
> it's a qcom specific OPP table.

OK, it's fine with me to have the fallback, but if we do we should be
consistent about it and make sure it's in all the bindings and device
tree files...

-Doug

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Viresh Kumar]

On 18-12-18, 11:05, Doug Anderson wrote:
> OK, it's fine with me to have the fallback, but if we do we should be
> consistent about it and make sure it's in all the bindings and device
> tree files...

Sure.

I am not sure what's the right way to do it is, i.e. should we keep the
"operating-points-v2" string or not. Another example I see is (which can be
compared here) is the board specific DT files. Normally the root node's
compatible is a long list of strings like:

compatible = "nvidia,p2371-2180", "nvidia,p2180", "nvidia,tegra210";

which starts from platform-specific string, then mach, then board, etc..

We do keep all of them in those cases and that makes me wonder why the same
shouldn't be done for OPP bindings.

-- 
viresh

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:49 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 18-12-18, 11:05, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > OK, it's fine with me to have the fallback, but if we do we should be
> > consistent about it and make sure it's in all the bindings and device
> > tree files...
>
> Sure.
>
> I am not sure what's the right way to do it is, i.e. should we keep the
> "operating-points-v2" string or not.

Does having it buy you anything? Given the QCom one doesn't have any
frequency or voltage, I don't see how it would be useful to have it.

Rob

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:49 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 18-12-18, 11:05, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > OK, it's fine with me to have the fallback, but if we do we should be
> > > consistent about it and make sure it's in all the bindings and device
> > > tree files...
> >
> > Sure.
> >
> > I am not sure what's the right way to do it is, i.e. should we keep the
> > "operating-points-v2" string or not.
>
> Does having it buy you anything? Given the QCom one doesn't have any
> frequency or voltage, I don't see how it would be useful to have it.

...but it does have a frequency, doesn't it?

+   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
+
+   opp-710000000 {
+     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
+     qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
+   };

-Doug

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:49 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 18-12-18, 11:05, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > > OK, it's fine with me to have the fallback, but if we do we should be
> > > > consistent about it and make sure it's in all the bindings and device
> > > > tree files...
> > >
> > > Sure.
> > >
> > > I am not sure what's the right way to do it is, i.e. should we keep the
> > > "operating-points-v2" string or not.
> >
> > Does having it buy you anything? Given the QCom one doesn't have any
> > frequency or voltage, I don't see how it would be useful to have it.
>
> ...but it does have a frequency, doesn't it?
>
> +   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> +
> +   opp-710000000 {
> +     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
> +     qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
> +   };

Ah, I perhaps see the confusion.  So Rajendra's usage of
"operating-points-v2-qcom-level" [1] doesn't have a frequency but
Jordan's do.  So I guess it makes sense that Jordan's have the
fallback compatible but Rajendra's don't?

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/

-Doug

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:49 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 18-12-18, 11:05, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > > > OK, it's fine with me to have the fallback, but if we do we should be
> > > > > consistent about it and make sure it's in all the bindings and device
> > > > > tree files...
> > > >
> > > > Sure.
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure what's the right way to do it is, i.e. should we keep the
> > > > "operating-points-v2" string or not.
> > >
> > > Does having it buy you anything? Given the QCom one doesn't have any
> > > frequency or voltage, I don't see how it would be useful to have it.
> >
> > ...but it does have a frequency, doesn't it?
> >
> > +   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > +
> > +   opp-710000000 {
> > +     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
> > +     qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
> > +   };
>
> Ah, I perhaps see the confusion.  So Rajendra's usage of
> "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" [1] doesn't have a frequency but
> Jordan's do.  So I guess it makes sense that Jordan's have the
> fallback compatible but Rajendra's don't?

Is having it useful to s/w that doesn't understand
"operating-points-v2-qcom-level"? If so, then add
"operating-points-v2". If not, then don't.

I don't really care either way. Just don't do both ways and document
which way is correct.

Rob

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Rob Herring (2018-12-19 15:47:25)
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > ...but it does have a frequency, doesn't it?
> > >
> > > +   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > > +
> > > +   opp-710000000 {
> > > +     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
> > > +     qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
> > > +   };
> >
> > Ah, I perhaps see the confusion.  So Rajendra's usage of
> > "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" [1] doesn't have a frequency but
> > Jordan's do.  So I guess it makes sense that Jordan's have the
> > fallback compatible but Rajendra's don't?
> 
> Is having it useful to s/w that doesn't understand
> "operating-points-v2-qcom-level"? If so, then add
> "operating-points-v2". If not, then don't.

The only benefit I see in having "operating-points-v2" is that we don't
need to update the of_skipped_node_table[] in drivers/platform/of.c to
have all the variants of operating-points-v2-* when they decide to not
use anything from the "base" binding.

If that fails to work because opp-hz is required for the
"operating-points-v2" binding but sometimes
operating-points-v2-qcom-level doesn't require it I guess we need to
update the skip table or make some generic property like
'this-is-not-a-device' that these various data tables in DT can be
marked with so we don't make platform devices for them.

Regardless of the above, we should update the binding for
operating-points-v2-qcom-level to say that opp-hz isn't always required
when the qcom-level compatible is present. It looks like it just says
that it builds on top of the opp binding so that's not obvious.


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Rajendra Nayak]

On 12/21/2018 2:59 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Rob Herring (2018-12-19 15:47:25)
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>> ...but it does have a frequency, doesn't it?
>>>>
>>>> +   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
>>>> +
>>>> +   opp-710000000 {
>>>> +     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
>>>> +     qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
>>>> +   };
>>>
>>> Ah, I perhaps see the confusion.  So Rajendra's usage of
>>> "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" [1] doesn't have a frequency but
>>> Jordan's do.  So I guess it makes sense that Jordan's have the
>>> fallback compatible but Rajendra's don't?
>>
>> Is having it useful to s/w that doesn't understand
>> "operating-points-v2-qcom-level"? If so, then add
>> "operating-points-v2". If not, then don't.
> 
> The only benefit I see in having "operating-points-v2" is that we don't
> need to update the of_skipped_node_table[] in drivers/platform/of.c to
> have all the variants of operating-points-v2-* when they decide to not
> use anything from the "base" binding.
> 
> If that fails to work because opp-hz is required for the
> "operating-points-v2" binding but sometimes
> operating-points-v2-qcom-level doesn't require it I guess we need to
> update the skip table or make some generic property like
> 'this-is-not-a-device' that these various data tables in DT can be
> marked with so we don't make platform devices for them.
> 
> Regardless of the above, we should update the binding for
> operating-points-v2-qcom-level to say that opp-hz isn't always required
> when the qcom-level compatible is present. It looks like it just says
> that it builds on top of the opp binding so that's not obvious.

Sure, I can respin with those details added in.
So I am guessing the conclusion is to use a fallback "operating-points-v2"
compatible *only* when we do have opp-hz along with qcom,level (as in the
case with gpu) and not have a fallback compatible in cases when we don't
have opp-hz (as in the case of rpm power domains)?
That seems a little inconsistent, and given Rob said either way is fine,
just do one way or the other and not both, I am inclined to think we should
just have a "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and no fallback compatible.
Does that make sense?

> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Rajendra Nayak (2018-12-20 20:52:34)
> 
> On 12/21/2018 2:59 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Rob Herring (2018-12-19 15:47:25)
> >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 4:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:40 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:09 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>> ...but it does have a frequency, doesn't it?
> >>>>
> >>>> +   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> >>>> +
> >>>> +   opp-710000000 {
> >>>> +     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <710000000>;
> >>>> +     qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_TURBO_L1>;
> >>>> +   };
> >>>
> >>> Ah, I perhaps see the confusion.  So Rajendra's usage of
> >>> "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" [1] doesn't have a frequency but
> >>> Jordan's do.  So I guess it makes sense that Jordan's have the
> >>> fallback compatible but Rajendra's don't?
> >>
> >> Is having it useful to s/w that doesn't understand
> >> "operating-points-v2-qcom-level"? If so, then add
> >> "operating-points-v2". If not, then don't.
> > 
> > The only benefit I see in having "operating-points-v2" is that we don't
> > need to update the of_skipped_node_table[] in drivers/platform/of.c to
> > have all the variants of operating-points-v2-* when they decide to not
> > use anything from the "base" binding.
> > 
> > If that fails to work because opp-hz is required for the
> > "operating-points-v2" binding but sometimes
> > operating-points-v2-qcom-level doesn't require it I guess we need to
> > update the skip table or make some generic property like
> > 'this-is-not-a-device' that these various data tables in DT can be
> > marked with so we don't make platform devices for them.
> > 
> > Regardless of the above, we should update the binding for
> > operating-points-v2-qcom-level to say that opp-hz isn't always required
> > when the qcom-level compatible is present. It looks like it just says
> > that it builds on top of the opp binding so that's not obvious.
> 
> Sure, I can respin with those details added in.

Ok.

> So I am guessing the conclusion is to use a fallback "operating-points-v2"
> compatible *only* when we do have opp-hz along with qcom,level (as in the
> case with gpu) and not have a fallback compatible in cases when we don't
> have opp-hz (as in the case of rpm power domains)?
> That seems a little inconsistent, and given Rob said either way is fine,
> just do one way or the other and not both, I am inclined to think we should
> just have a "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and no fallback compatible.
> Does that make sense?
> 

Are you going to update the skip table to not create platform devices?
Or introduce some generic property to indicate that this is just data
and not a device node?


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Rajendra Nayak]

On 12/29/2018 6:59 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> So I am guessing the conclusion is to use a fallback "operating-points-v2"
>> compatible*only*  when we do have opp-hz along with qcom,level (as in the
>> case with gpu) and not have a fallback compatible in cases when we don't
>> have opp-hz (as in the case of rpm power domains)?
>> That seems a little inconsistent, and given Rob said either way is fine,
>> just do one way or the other and not both, I am inclined to think we should
>> just have a "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and no fallback compatible.
>> Does that make sense?
>>
> Are you going to update the skip table to not create platform devices?
> Or introduce some generic property to indicate that this is just data
> and not a device node?

Is any of it really needed, given the bindings specify that the OPP table
should actually be a child node of the device/power domain supporting
it? I don't see who would end up creating platform devices for them.


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Rajendra Nayak (2019-01-03 00:45:53)
> 
> On 12/29/2018 6:59 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >> So I am guessing the conclusion is to use a fallback "operating-points-v2"
> >> compatible*only*  when we do have opp-hz along with qcom,level (as in the
> >> case with gpu) and not have a fallback compatible in cases when we don't
> >> have opp-hz (as in the case of rpm power domains)?
> >> That seems a little inconsistent, and given Rob said either way is fine,
> >> just do one way or the other and not both, I am inclined to think we should
> >> just have a "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and no fallback compatible.
> >> Does that make sense?
> >>
> > Are you going to update the skip table to not create platform devices?
> > Or introduce some generic property to indicate that this is just data
> > and not a device node?
> 
> Is any of it really needed, given the bindings specify that the OPP table
> should actually be a child node of the device/power domain supporting
> it? I don't see who would end up creating platform devices for them.
> 

Good point. If it's a child node then almost all the time we won't be
trying to populate the OPP node as another platform device so this isn't
really important to handle until that happens, which is probably never.


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel