Re: [PATCH 5/8] arm64: dts: qcom: Add SDX75 platform and IDP board support

[Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@quicinc.com>]

On 5/30/2023 11:19 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
> On 30.05.2023 13:40, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
>> Thanks for reviewing. Sorry for the late reply was on leave.
>>
>> On 5/19/2023 10:58 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On 19.05.2023 11:09, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
>>>> Add basic devicetree support for SDX75 platform and IDP board from
>>>> Qualcomm. The SDX75 platform features an ARM Cortex A55 CPU which forms
>>>> the Application Processor Sub System (APSS) along with standard Qualcomm
>>>> peripherals like GCC, TLMM, UART, QPIC, and BAM etc... Also, there
>>>> exists the networking parts such as IPA, MHI, PCIE-EP, EMAC, and Modem
>>>> etc..
>>>>
>>>> This commit adds basic devicetree support.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@quicinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile      |   1 +
>>>>    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75-idp.dts |  19 ++
>>>>    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75.dtsi    | 534 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    3 files changed, 554 insertions(+)
>>>>    create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75-idp.dts
>>>>    create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75.dtsi
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
>>>> index d42c595..4fd5a18 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
>>>> @@ -173,6 +173,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sdm845-xiaomi-polaris.dtb
>>>>    dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sdm845-shift-axolotl.dtb
>>>>    dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sdm850-lenovo-yoga-c630.dtb
>>>>    dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sdm850-samsung-w737.dtb
>>>> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sdx75-idp.dtb
>>>>    dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sm4250-oneplus-billie2.dtb
>>>>    dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sm6115p-lenovo-j606f.dtb
>>>>    dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)    += sm6125-sony-xperia-seine-pdx201.dtb
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75-idp.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75-idp.dts
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..e2e803b
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75-idp.dts
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Copyright (c) 2023 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved.
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> +/dts-v1/;
>>>> +
>>>> +#include "sdx75.dtsi"
>>>> +
>>>> +/ {
>>>> +    model = "Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. SDX75 IDP";
>>>> +    compatible = "qcom,sdx75-idp", "qcom,sdx75";
>>>> +    qcom,board-id = <0x2010022 0x302>;
>>> You should be able to get by without qcom,{msm,board}-id.
>> Actually the bootloader requires the msm and board id. Shouldn't this become a necessary field then?
> We generally discourage that, especially since at least on the LA front
> it became unnecessary (no msm-id and appended dtb -> abl picks the only
> one present).. I'm not sure at what point in product dev the SDX75 is,
> but if we could get rid of that requirement, it'd be very nice..
>
> OTOH getting rid of it just on one device and keeping it necessary with
> fw builds that have been distributed to vendors sounds wouldn't be
> very beneficial either :/
Going deeper in the ABL code, Got to know that ABL does support the 
single appended DTB.
So will go ahead and remove the board-id and msm-id from this.

Thanks,
Rohit.

>
> Konrad
>>>> +
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +&tlmm {
>>>> +    gpio-reserved-ranges = <110 6>;
>>>> +};
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75.dtsi
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..c2b8810
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75.dtsi
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,534 @@
>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * SDX75 SoC device tree source
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Copyright (c) 2023 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved.
>>>> + *
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h>
>>>> +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>>>> +#include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +/ {
>>>> +    #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> +    #size-cells = <2>;
>>>> +    qcom,msm-id = <556 0x10000>;
>>>> +    interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
>>>> +
>>>> +    chosen: chosen { };
>>>> +
>>>> +    memory {
>>> The memory node should have a unit address.
>> Sure will update this.
>>>> +        device_type = "memory";
>>>> +        reg = <0 0 0 0>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    clocks { };
>>>> +
>>>> +    cpus {
>>>> +        #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> +        #size-cells = <0>;
>>>> +
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +        CLUSTER_PD: power-domain-cpu-cluster0 {
>>>> +            #power-domain-cells = <0>;
>>>> +            domain-idle-states = <&CLUSTER_SLEEP_0 &CX_RET &CLUSTER_SLEEP_1>;
>>> Is CLUSTER_SLEEP_1 deeper than CX retention?
>> Yes
>>>> +        };
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    firmware {
>>>> +        scm: scm {
>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,scm-sdx75", "qcom,scm";
>>>> +        };
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    pmu {
>>>> +        compatible = "arm,armv8-pmuv3";
>>>> +        interrupts = <GIC_PPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    reserved-memory {
>>>> +        #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> +        #size-cells = <2>;
>>>> +        ranges;
>>>> +
>>>> +        gunyah_hyp_mem: memory@80000000 {
>>> reserved memory subnodes should have meaningful node names, e.g.
>>>
>>> hypervisor@800...
>> Will update this.
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0x80000000 0x0 0x800000>;
>>>> +            no-map;
>>>> +        };
>>>> +
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +    smem: qcom,smem {
>>>> +        compatible = "qcom,smem";
>>>> +        memory-region = <&smem_mem>;
>>>> +        hwlocks = <&tcsr_mutex 3>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    soc: soc {
>>>> +        #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> +        #size-cells = <2>;
>>>> +        ranges;
>>> Are the SoC buses limited to 32b addresses?
>> No, Will fix this in the next.
>>>> +        compatible = "simple-bus";
>>> Compatible should go first.
>> Yes, Ok.
>>>> +
>>>> +        tcsr_mutex: hwlock@1f40000 {
>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0x01f40000 0x0 0x40000>;
>>>> +            #hwlock-cells = <1>;
>>>> +        };
>>>> +
>>>> +        pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 {
>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,sdx75-pdc", "qcom,pdc";
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0xb220000 0x0 0x30000>,
>>>> +                  <0x0 0x174000f0 0x0 0x64>;
>>>> +            qcom,pdc-ranges = <0 147 52>,
>>>> +                      <52 266 32>,
>>>> +                      <84 500 59>;
>>>> +            #interrupt-cells = <2>;
>>>> +            interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
>>>> +            interrupt-controller;
>>>> +        };
>>>> +
>>>> +        tlmm: pinctrl@f000000 {
>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,sdx75-tlmm";
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0x0f000000 0x0 0x400000>;
>>>> +            interrupts = <GIC_SPI 212 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>>> +            gpio-controller;
>>>> +            #gpio-cells = <2>;
>>>> +            gpio-ranges = <&tlmm 0 0 133>;
>>>> +            interrupt-controller;
>>>> +            #interrupt-cells = <2>;
>>>> +            wakeup-parent = <&pdc>;
>>>> +        };
>>>> +
>>>> +        apps_smmu: iommu@15000000 {
>>>> +            compatible = "qcom,sdx75-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500";
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0x15000000 0x0 0x40000>;
>>>> +            #iommu-cells = <2>;
>>>> +            #global-interrupts = <2>;
>>>> +            interrupts = <GIC_SPI 65 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 68 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 69 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 70 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 71 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 72 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 73 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 94 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 95 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 96 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 97 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 98 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 99 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 100 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 101 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 102 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 103 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 104 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 105 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 106 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 107 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 108 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 109 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 110 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 298 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 299 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 300 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 301 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 302 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 303 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 304 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 305 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>>> +                     <GIC_SPI 306 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>> Many newer SoCs have dma-coherent SMMUs. Is this the case here?
>> Yes, Will add the dma-coherent property here.
>>>> +        };
>>>> +
>>>> +        intc: interrupt-controller@17200000 {
>>>> +            compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
>>>> +            #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>>>> +            interrupt-controller;
>>>> +            #redistributor-regions = <1>;
>>>> +            redistributor-stride = <0x0 0x20000>;
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0x17200000 0x0 0x10000>,
>>>> +                  <0x0 0x17260000 0x0 0x80000>;
>>>> +            interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>>> +        };
>>>> +
>>>> +        timer@17420000 {
>>>> +            compatible = "arm,armv7-timer-mem";
>>>> +            #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> +            #size-cells = <2>;
>>>> +            ranges;
>>>> +            reg = <0x0 0x17420000 0x0 0x1000>;
>>>> +            clock-frequency = <19200000>;
>>> clock-frequency is discouraged, unless strictly necessary.
>>>
>>> Since gh is running, the timer is already programmed so it should be
>>> fine to drop this.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +    timer {
>>>> +        compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
>>>> +        interrupts = <GIC_PPI 13 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
>>>> +                 <GIC_PPI 14 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
>>>> +                 <GIC_PPI 11 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>,
>>>> +                 <GIC_PPI 12 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW)>;
>>>> +        clock-frequency = <19200000>;
>>> Ditto
>> Ok Thanks for the info. Dropping the clock frequency property in the next version.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rohit.
>>> Konrad
>>>> +    };
>>>> +};