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=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 9E328C54E4A for ; Mon, 11 May 2020 22:18:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7831D206E6 for ; Mon, 11 May 2020 22:18:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1589235482; bh=MBHatxwDoIyD6uh00m5HuFdutrrX84YoaJnOUAb+G2w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MvV78ZxFcpwn+s1/4qhQPuxqj0xdjKOr0cOGv0ydwg/tUJ3z92+W13jq1rRs21K4G 6WBEnEO1XFAW6Sd2B6KGbARh1Ub4SnR9KG2zErqNi0RWs7TCAs5M64oDi19ufxXlkM ZKyCorY4u5eKNwFWLeBgs2jc9Y5x2e0F8tdkUiHE= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725877AbgEKWR7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2020 18:17:59 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f195.google.com ([209.85.167.195]:34596 "EHLO mail-oi1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725828AbgEKWR7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2020 18:17:59 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f195.google.com with SMTP id c12so15546950oic.1; Mon, 11 May 2020 15:17:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=rzMFWA1ZnkRS4Q0DpZb1ZXl62uf9QCHFsi7YkKI8qTU=; b=km+W7YWfycC8pxYRBgv6wEkz4Wyj6O7RG5MPn07qseLUQs0MVY2LdFYBIXlZJbAnZW /96FjHaP0lDWbifuWaQQp95O+Sw9GLi+ubmFMGeEvTbBFwW7G7q9mjMjPPbHZmX+LZYi zXWEX70wwZOK28I/NaeZYHuUrXuJMyFwcI50ZdyhlFDtn2OOzeJOuYflNqvHWZPoG/Ni 81TLCL7rsQ1Abh2B/X4dkbrvTNuX/HsstmXkcHZkQ9NhdcajeltXMk+HNURaMXodJ4q0 zbY94GorhSSQlpsWE85N5avxVB6JcThtwkAh9c3z3uj67elHQohNYT0xxXNTNgK57luF YRqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaR05QfRhTwHe14B9fIbqYtCb9b9n9InwzOAw9oaC03vcBdhvi8 b5XzRDFK1F0it0CFxBM4cw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypK0TZHCKyJ3o83UAgu+4BaXew5kyfHBthWDWkDub8PJ/mLJuKeKeozKHpokZfteZCSegTZxMA== X-Received: by 2002:aca:cc15:: with SMTP id c21mr22407701oig.120.1589235477409; Mon, 11 May 2020 15:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rob-hp-laptop (24-155-109-49.dyn.grandenetworks.net. [24.155.109.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t13sm2995644otr.43.2020.05.11.15.17.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 11 May 2020 15:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (nullmailer pid 14664 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 11 May 2020 22:17:55 -0000 Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 17:17:55 -0500 From: Rob Herring To: Ben Levinsky Cc: ohad@wizery.com, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, michal.simek@xilinx.com, jollys@xilinx.com, rajan.vaja@xilinx.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Wu , Wendy Liang Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings Message-ID: <20200511221755.GA13585@bogus> References: <1587749770-15082-1-git-send-email-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> <1587749770-15082-5-git-send-email-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1587749770-15082-5-git-send-email-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-remoteproc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 10:36:09AM -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. This needs to be sorted out as part of the system DT effort that Xilinx is working on. I can't see this binding co-existing with it. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky > Signed-off-by: Jason Wu > Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > --- > Changes since v2: > - 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. > Changes since 3: > - 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. > --- > > .../remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc.yaml | 127 +++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 127 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 0000000..41520b6 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@ > +# 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. > + > +maintainers: > + - Ed Mooring > + - Ben Levinsky > + > +properties: > + compatible: > + const: "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0" > + > + core_conf: > + description: > + R5 core configuration (valid string - split or lock-step) > + maxItems: 1 > + > + 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: > + maxItems: 4 > + minItems: 4 > + pnode-id: > + maxItems: 1 What is this? > + mboxes: > + maxItems: 2 > + mbox-names: > + maxItems: 2 > + > + r5@0: > + type: object > + required: > + - '#address-cells' > + - '#size-cells' > + - pnode-id > +examples: > + - | > + reserved-memory { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + ranges; > + rpu0vdev0vring0: rpu0vdev0vring0@3ed40000 { > + no-map; > + reg = <0x3ed40000 0x4000>; > + }; > + rpu0vdev0vring1: rpu0vdev0vring1@3ed44000 { > + no-map; > + reg = <0x3ed44000 0x4000>; > + }; > + rpu0vdev0buffer: rpu0vdev0buffer@3ed48000 { > + no-map; > + reg = <0x3ed48000 0x100000>; > + }; > + rproc_0_reserved: rproc@3ed000000 { > + no-map; > + reg = <0x3ed00000 0x40000>; > + }; > + }; > + rpu: rpu@ff9a0000 { > + compatible = "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0"; > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + ranges; > + core_conf = "split"; If split, then where is the 2nd core? > + reg = <0xFF9A0000 0x10000>; > + r5_0: r5@0 { Unit-addresses are based on 'reg' values. > + ranges; > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + reg = <0xFF9A0100 0x1000>; > + memory-region = <&rproc_0_reserved>, <&rpu0vdev0buffer>, <&rpu0vdev0vring0>, <&rpu0vdev0vring1>; > + pnode-id = <0x7>; > + mboxes = <&ipi_mailbox_rpu0 0>, <&ipi_mailbox_rpu0 1>; > + mbox-names = "tx", "rx"; > + tcm_0_a: tcm_0@0 { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + reg = <0xFFE00000 0x10000>; > + pnode-id = <0xf>; These nodes probably need some sort of compatible. And don't the TCMs have different addresses for R5 vs. the A cores? > + }; > + tcm_0_b: tcm_0@1 { > + #address-cells = <2>; > + #size-cells = <2>; > + reg = <0xFFE20000 0x10000>; > + pnode-id = <0x10>; > + }; > + }; > + }; > + > + > + zynqmp_ipi1 { > + compatible = "xlnx,zynqmp-ipi-mailbox"; > + interrupt-parent = <&gic>; > + interrupts = <0 29 4>; > + xlnx,ipi-id = <7>; > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + ranges; > + > + /* APU<->RPU0 IPI mailbox controller */ > + ipi_mailbox_rpu0: mailbox@ff90000 { > + reg = <0xff990600 0x20>, > + <0xff990620 0x20>, > + <0xff9900c0 0x20>, > + <0xff9900e0 0x20>; > + reg-names = "local_request_region", > + "local_response_region", > + "remote_request_region", > + "remote_response_region"; > + #mbox-cells = <1>; > + xlnx,ipi-id = <1>; > + }; > + }; > + > +... > -- > 2.7.4 >