* [GIT PULL 0/3] ARM: exynos: Second round of stuff for v4.9
@ 2016-09-18 16:39 Krzysztof Kozlowski
2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers " Krzysztof Kozlowski
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Olof Johansson, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz,
Krzysztof Kozlowski, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
Hi,
I know it is late but it is not a big pull request. Mostly DT cleanup.
One change touching clocksource was acked by Daniel Lezcano (he
mentioned it can go through arm-soc).
Some stuff moved into topic branch. No conflicts expected, no specific
order of pulling.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-09-18 16:39 [GIT PULL 0/3] ARM: exynos: Second round of stuff for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-19 15:02 ` Arnd Bergmann 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: exynos: DT for v4.9, second round Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 3/3] ARM: dts: exynos: pinctrl cleanup for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olof Johansson, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Hi, Drivers related changes. Best regards, Krzysztof The following changes since commit 29b4817d4018df78086157ea3a55c1d9424a7cfc: Linux 4.8-rc1 (2016-08-07 18:18:00 -0700) are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux.git tags/samsung-drivers-4.9-2 for you to fetch changes up to 8bc6bf178b671eb9b9fa806804f3990cb4c332aa: dt-bindings: EXYNOS: Add Exynos5433 PMU compatible (2016-09-16 13:21:04 +0200) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more will be coming soon). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Chanwoo Choi (2): clocksource: exynos_mct: Add the support for ARM64 dt-bindings: EXYNOS: Add Exynos5433 PMU compatible Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/samsung/pmu.txt | 1 + drivers/clocksource/Kconfig | 2 +- drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c | 4 ++++ 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers " Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-19 15:02 ` Arnd Bergmann 2016-09-19 15:53 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2016-09-19 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Olof Johansson, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: > 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. > 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more > will be coming soon). Pulled into next/drivers, thanks Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64 but not the delay-timer portion of it? Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-09-19 15:02 ` Arnd Bergmann @ 2016-09-19 15:53 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-10-03 0:25 ` Olof Johansson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-19 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Olof Johansson, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: > > 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. > > 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more > > will be coming soon). > > Pulled into next/drivers, thanks > > Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64 > but not the delay-timer portion of it? I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower 32-bit value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8. > > Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these > chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. Very tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 board without some MCT magic. Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-09-19 15:53 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-10-03 0:25 ` Olof Johansson 2016-10-03 7:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Olof Johansson @ 2016-10-03 0:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> > Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: >> > 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. >> > 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more >> > will be coming soon). >> >> Pulled into next/drivers, thanks >> >> Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64 >> but not the delay-timer portion of it? > > I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c > ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not > ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two > versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower 32-bit > value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8. > >> >> Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these >> chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? > > No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some > interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. Very > tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 board without > some MCT magic. What kind of magic is that? I can understand that needing the MCT for some system-level timer functionality might be true (wakeups, etc), but for system timesource avoiding the MMIO timer and using the arch ones is a substantial performance improvement for gettimeofday() and friends. There was extensive discussion last year over using arch timers on 5420/5422, and it fizzled out with vague comments about something not working right between A15/A7 on b.L. hardware. I'm presuming whatever implementation details of that SoC has since been fixed on later chips (including v8). Any chance you can confirm? It'd be very nice to leave MCT behind on v8 as a system time source. -Olof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-10-03 0:25 ` Olof Johansson @ 2016-10-03 7:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-10-03 12:19 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-10-03 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olof Johansson Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 05:25:07PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> > Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: > >> > 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. > >> > 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more > >> > will be coming soon). > >> > >> Pulled into next/drivers, thanks > >> > >> Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64 > >> but not the delay-timer portion of it? > > > > I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c > > ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not > > ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two > > versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower 32-bit > > value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8. > > > >> > >> Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these > >> chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? > > > > No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some > > interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. Very > > tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 board without > > some MCT magic. > > What kind of magic is that? Most notably: the arch timer starts when MCT forward running counter starts. Without kicking MCT, the arch timer seems to be frozen. > I can understand that needing the MCT for > some system-level timer functionality might be true (wakeups, etc), > but for system timesource avoiding the MMIO timer and using the arch > ones is a substantial performance improvement for gettimeofday() and > friends. > > There was extensive discussion last year over using arch timers on > 5420/5422, and it fizzled out with vague comments about something not > working right between A15/A7 on b.L. hardware. I'm presuming whatever > implementation details of that SoC has since been fixed on later chips > (including v8). Any chance you can confirm? It'd be very nice to leave > MCT behind on v8 as a system time source. Unfortunately, I cannot confirm this, at least on Exynos5433 (ARMv8). I played with arch and MCT timers on it and failed to get the arch-timer-only setup working. I did not have access to newer Exynos designs (Exynos 7) so I do not know how it works there. Best regards, Krzysztof ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-10-03 7:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-10-03 12:19 ` Kukjin Kim 2016-10-11 0:46 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2016-10-03 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Olof Johansson, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano 2016. 10. 3. 15:48 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 05:25:07PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: >>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: >>>>> 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. >>>>> 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more >>>>> will be coming soon). >>>> >>>> Pulled into next/drivers, thanks >>>> >>>> Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64 >>>> but not the delay-timer portion of it? >>> >>> I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c >>> ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not >>> ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two >>> versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower 32-bit >>> value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8. >>> >>>> >>>> Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these >>>> chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? >>> >>> No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some >>> interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. Very >>> tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 board without >>> some MCT magic. >> >> What kind of magic is that? > > Most notably: the arch timer starts when MCT forward running counter > starts. Without kicking MCT, the arch timer seems to be frozen. > >> I can understand that needing the MCT for >> some system-level timer functionality might be true (wakeups, etc), >> but for system timesource avoiding the MMIO timer and using the arch >> ones is a substantial performance improvement for gettimeofday() and >> friends. >> >> There was extensive discussion last year over using arch timers on >> 5420/5422, and it fizzled out with vague comments about something not >> working right between A15/A7 on b.L. hardware. I'm presuming whatever >> implementation details of that SoC has since been fixed on later chips >> (including v8). Any chance you can confirm? It'd be very nice to leave >> MCT behind on v8 as a system time source. > > Unfortunately, I cannot confirm this, at least on Exynos5433 (ARMv8). I > played with arch and MCT timers on it and failed to get the > arch-timer-only setup working. I did not have access to newer Exynos > designs (Exynos 7) so I do not know how it works there. Hi guys, I know what Olof want to know and actually several days ago someone asked me about that. As you guys talked, a couple of years ago there were some discussions...BTW I need to contact to hardware designer before let you guys know because something needs to be confirmed by them even I know roughly. Note I'm in vacation with my family. Will be back on this in several days with exact information. BRs, Kukjin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-10-03 12:19 ` Kukjin Kim @ 2016-10-11 0:46 ` Kukjin Kim 2016-10-11 0:58 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2016-10-11 0:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Olof Johansson, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas, Daniel Lezcano, kgene.kim 2016. 10. 3. 21:19 Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@gmail.com> wrote: + my samsung email > 2016. 10. 3. 15:48 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > >>>> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 05:25:07PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>>> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>> Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: >>>>>> 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. >>>>>> 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout driver and more >>>>>> will be coming soon). >>>>> >>>>> Pulled into next/drivers, thanks >>>>> >>>>> Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on ARM64 >>>>> but not the delay-timer portion of it? >>>> >>>> I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c >>>> ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not >>>> ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two >>>> versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower 32-bit >>>> value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on these >>>>> chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? >>>> >>>> No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some >>>> interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. Very >>>> tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 board without >>>> some MCT magic. >>> >>> What kind of magic is that? >> >> Most notably: the arch timer starts when MCT forward running counter >> starts. Without kicking MCT, the arch timer seems to be frozen. >> >>> I can understand that needing the MCT for >>> some system-level timer functionality might be true (wakeups, etc), >>> but for system timesource avoiding the MMIO timer and using the arch >>> ones is a substantial performance improvement for gettimeofday() and >>> friends. >>> >>> There was extensive discussion last year over using arch timers on >>> 5420/5422, and it fizzled out with vague comments about something not >>> working right between A15/A7 on b.L. hardware. I'm presuming whatever >>> implementation details of that SoC has since been fixed on later chips >>> (including v8). Any chance you can confirm? It'd be very nice to leave >>> MCT behind on v8 as a system time source. >> >> Unfortunately, I cannot confirm this, at least on Exynos5433 (ARMv8). I >> played with arch and MCT timers on it and failed to get the >> arch-timer-only setup working. I did not have access to newer Exynos >> designs (Exynos 7) so I do not know how it works there. > > Hi guys, > > I know what Olof want to know and actually several days ago someone asked me about that. As you guys talked, a couple of years ago there were some discussions...BTW I need to contact to hardware designer before let you guys know because something needs to be confirmed by them even I know roughly. > > Note I'm in vacation with my family. Will be back on this in several days with exact information. > > BRs, > Kukjin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers for v4.9 2016-10-11 0:46 ` Kukjin Kim @ 2016-10-11 0:58 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2016-10-11 0:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Kukjin Kim', 'Krzysztof Kozlowski' Cc: 'Olof Johansson', 'Arnd Bergmann', 'Kevin Hilman', arm, 'Kukjin Kim', linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, 'Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz', 'Javier Martinez Canillas', 'Daniel Lezcano' Kukjin Kim wrote: - Krzysztof's samsung email because he is not using now > > 2016. 10. 3. 21:19 Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@gmail.com> wrote: > > + my samsung email > > > 2016. 10. 3. 15:48 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > >>>> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 05:25:07PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >>>>>> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:46 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>>>> Samsung drivers/soc update for v4.9: > >>>>>> 1. Allow compile testing of exynos-mct clocksource driver on ARM64. > >>>>>> 2. Document Exynos5433 PMU compatible (already used by clkout > >>>>>> driver and more will be coming soon). > >>>>> > >>>>> Pulled into next/drivers, thanks > >>>>> > >>>>> Just for my understanding: why do we need the exynos-mct driver on > >>>>> ARM64 but not the delay-timer portion of it? > >>>> > >>>> I think we want all of it but Doug's optimization 3252a646aa2c > >>>> ("clocksource: exynos_mct: Only use 32-bits where possible") is not > >>>> ARM64 friendly. One way of dealing with it would be to prepare two > >>>> versions of exynos4_read_current_timer(). One reading only lower > >>>> 32-bit value for ARMv7 and second (slow) reading lower and upper for ARMv8. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Is there an advantage in using MCT over the architected timer on > >>>>> these chips? If so, should we also have a way to use it as the delay timer? > >>>> > >>>> No, there is no real advantage... except that the SoC has some > >>>> interesting "characteristics"... The timers are tightly coupled. > >>>> Very tightly. I spent a lot of time and failed to boot my ARMv8 > >>>> board without some MCT magic. > >>> > >>> What kind of magic is that? > >> > >> Most notably: the arch timer starts when MCT forward running counter > >> starts. Without kicking MCT, the arch timer seems to be frozen. > >> > >>> I can understand that needing the MCT for some system-level timer > >>> functionality might be true (wakeups, etc), Yes correct, the MCT is designed for the power consumption related functionalities such as cluster power down > >>> but for system > >>> timesource avoiding the MMIO timer and using the arch ones is a > >>> substantial performance improvement for gettimeofday() and friends. > >>> At this moment, we can use the ARM arch timers as clocksource so I think no performance degradation (some latency?) with using the CP15 access for the gettimeofday() and friends > >>> There was extensive discussion last year over using arch timers on > >>> 5420/5422, and it fizzled out with vague comments about something > >>> not working right between A15/A7 on b.L. hardware. Current Exynos SoCs including ARMv8 architecture based have no hardware something which means 'not working right' > >>> I'm presuming > >>> whatever implementation details of that SoC has since been fixed on > >>> later chips (including v8). Any chance you can confirm? It'd be very > >>> nice to leave MCT behind on v8 as a system time source. It is depending on system level design architecture. If we don't need to support some power mode such as cluster power down, we can use arch timers without the MCT but actual product needed to support it for power consumption. Let me add some comments. According to the ARM architecture design, the ARM arch timers require toggle from outside of the core as timer source and we're using the MCT for it. And we can use the ARM arch timers as clocksource not the MCT on current Exynos. > >> Unfortunately, I cannot confirm this, at least on Exynos5433 (ARMv8). > >> I played with arch and MCT timers on it and failed to get the > >> arch-timer-only setup working. I did not have access to newer Exynos > >> designs (Exynos 7) so I do not know how it works there. > > > > Hi guys, > > > > I know what Olof want to know and actually several days ago someone asked me about that. As you guys > talked, a couple of years ago there were some discussions...BTW I need to contact to hardware designer > before let you guys know because something needs to be confirmed by them even I know roughly. > > > > Note I'm in vacation with my family. Will be back on this in several days with exact information. > > > > BRs, > > Kukjin k-gene ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: exynos: DT for v4.9, second round 2016-09-18 16:39 [GIT PULL 0/3] ARM: exynos: Second round of stuff for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers " Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-19 15:46 ` Arnd Bergmann 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 3/3] ARM: dts: exynos: pinctrl cleanup for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olof Johansson, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Javier Martinez Canillas From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> The following changes since commit 05b01dd936b46f2c3cfbb10bc89c0ec79c745e5d: ARM: dts: exynos: Use 'hpd-gpios' instead of 'hpd-gpio' (2016-08-24 21:09:24 +0200) are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux.git tags/samsung-dt-4.9-2 for you to fetch changes up to 5271d002709e8ca27232ab031f35e0df1d0fe4ed: ARM: dts: s5p: Add missing unit name to memory nodes for S5PV210 boards (2016-09-16 09:17:00 +0200) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Samsung DeviceTree update for v4.9, second round: 1. Enable HDMI on Arndale Octa board. 2. Update list of clocks for FIMC-IS block on Exynos4x12. 3. Remove skeleton.dtsi thus fixing DT compiler warning: "Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name" This is a tree-wide effort by various people. Javier Martinez Canillas did it for Exynos and S5PV210. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Javier Martinez Canillas (9): ARM: dts: exynos: Add missing memory node for Exynos5440 boards ARM: dts: exynos: Remove skeleton.dtsi usage for Exynos3 ARM: dts: exynos: Remove skeleton.dtsi usage for Exynos4 ARM: dts: exynos: Remove skeleton.dtsi usage for Exynos5 ARM: dts: exynos: Add missing unit name to memory nodes in Exynos3 DTS ARM: dts: exynos: Add missing unit name to memory nodes in Exynos4 DTS ARM: dts: exynos: Add missing unit name to memory nodes in Exynos5 DTS ARM: dts: s5p: Remove skeleton.dtsi inclusion for S5PV210 ARM: dts: s5p: Add missing unit name to memory nodes for S5PV210 boards Marek Szyprowski (1): ARM: dts: exynos: Add all required FIMC-IS clocks to exynos4x12 Milo Kim (1): ARM: dts: exynos: Enable HDMI for Arndale Octa board arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-artik5.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-monk.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-rinato.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-origen.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-smdkv310.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-trats.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-universal_c210.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroidu3.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroidx.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroidx2.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-origen.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-smdk4412.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-tiny4412.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-trats2.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4415.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4x12.dtsi | 5 ++++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-arndale.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow-common.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-spring.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5260-xyref5260.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5260.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5410-odroidxu.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5410-smdk5410.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-arndale-octa.dts | 16 +++++++++++++++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-smdk5420.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroidxu3-common.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-sd5v1.dts | 6 ++++++ arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-ssdk5440.dts | 6 ++++++ arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi | 1 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5800-peach-pi.dts | 3 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-aquila.dts | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-goni.dts | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-smdkc110.dts | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-smdkv210.dts | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-torbreck.dts | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210.dtsi | 4 +++- 42 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: exynos: DT for v4.9, second round 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: exynos: DT for v4.9, second round Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-19 15:46 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2016-09-19 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Olof Johansson, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Javier Martinez Canillas On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:47 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Samsung DeviceTree update for v4.9, second round: > 1. Enable HDMI on Arndale Octa board. > 2. Update list of clocks for FIMC-IS block on Exynos4x12. > 3. Remove skeleton.dtsi thus fixing DT compiler warning: > "Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name" > This is a tree-wide effort by various people. Javier Martinez Canillas did > it for Exynos and S5PV210. > Pulled into next/dt, thanks! Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [GIT PULL 3/3] ARM: dts: exynos: pinctrl cleanup for v4.9 2016-09-18 16:39 [GIT PULL 0/3] ARM: exynos: Second round of stuff for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers " Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: exynos: DT for v4.9, second round Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-19 15:48 ` Arnd Bergmann 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-18 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Olof Johansson, Arnd Bergmann, Kevin Hilman, arm Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz, Krzysztof Kozlowski From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Hi, A separate topic branch with DT cleanup. Best regards, Krzysztof The following changes since commit 29b4817d4018df78086157ea3a55c1d9424a7cfc: Linux 4.8-rc1 (2016-08-07 18:18:00 -0700) are available in the git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux.git tags/samsung-dt-pinctrl-4.9 for you to fetch changes up to d13799237dee34e1b9cd377f0ced7bee24ac810f: ARM: dts: s3c64xx: Use macros for pinctrl configuration (2016-09-16 13:32:27 +0200) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Topic branch for Samsung DeviceTree cleanup for 4.9. Replace in DT sources hard-coded values for pinctrl configuration like pull up/down, drive strength and function. This makes the DTS easier to read, especially that some drive strengths values are quite non-obvious. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Krzysztof Kozlowski (17): pinctrl: dt-bindings: samsung: Add header with values used for configuration pinctrl: dt-bindings: samsung: Update documentation with new macros ARM: dts: exynos: Use common macros for pinctrl configuration ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos3250 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos4210 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos4x12 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos4415 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos5250 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos5260 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos5410 ARM: dts: exynos: Use macros for pinctrl configuration on exynos542x/exynos5800 ARM: dts: exynos: Fix mismatched value for SD4 pull up/down configuration on exynos4210 ARM: dts: exynos: Fix mismatched values of SD drive strengh configuration on exynos4415 ARM: dts: s3c64xx: Use common macros for pinctrl configuration ARM: dts: s5pv210: Use macros for pinctrl configuration ARM: dts: s3c2416: Use macros for pinctrl configuration ARM: dts: s3c64xx: Use macros for pinctrl configuration .../bindings/pinctrl/samsung-pinctrl.txt | 44 +- MAINTAINERS | 2 + arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-pinctrl.dtsi | 346 +++++++------- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-pinctrl.dtsi | 458 +++++++++--------- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-smdkv310.dts | 12 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-universal_c210.dts | 8 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroid-common.dtsi | 14 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroidx.dts | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-origen.dts | 12 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-smdk4412.dts | 12 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4415-pinctrl.dtsi | 296 ++++++------ arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4x12-pinctrl.dtsi | 525 ++++++++++----------- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-pinctrl.dtsi | 404 ++++++++-------- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts | 6 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow-common.dtsi | 76 +-- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow-rev5.dts | 6 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 6 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-spring.dts | 72 +-- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5260-pinctrl.dtsi | 280 ++++++----- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5260-xyref5260.dts | 6 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5410-odroidxu.dts | 30 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5410-pinctrl.dtsi | 182 +++---- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5410-smdk5410.dts | 10 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-arndale-octa.dts | 6 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts | 126 ++--- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-pinctrl.dtsi | 356 +++++++------- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-smdk5420.dts | 18 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroidxu3-common.dtsi | 18 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5800-peach-pi.dts | 126 ++--- arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c2416-pinctrl.dtsi | 38 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c6410-mini6410.dts | 4 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c64xx-pinctrl.dtsi | 356 +++++++------- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-aquila.dts | 4 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/s5pv210-pinctrl.dtsi | 476 +++++++++---------- include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/samsung.h | 57 +++ 35 files changed, 2223 insertions(+), 2171 deletions(-) create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/pinctrl/samsung.h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL 3/3] ARM: dts: exynos: pinctrl cleanup for v4.9 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 3/3] ARM: dts: exynos: pinctrl cleanup for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski @ 2016-09-19 15:48 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2016-09-19 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Olof Johansson, Kevin Hilman, arm, Krzysztof Kozlowski, Kukjin Kim, linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, linux-kernel, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz On Sunday, September 18, 2016 6:39:48 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Topic branch for Samsung DeviceTree cleanup for 4.9. > > Replace in DT sources hard-coded values for pinctrl configuration like pull > up/down, drive strength and function. This makes the DTS easier to read, > especially that some drive strengths values are quite non-obvious. > > Pulled into next/dt, thanks! Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-10-11 0:59 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-09-18 16:39 [GIT PULL 0/3] ARM: exynos: Second round of stuff for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 1/3] ARM: soc: exynos: Drivers " Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-19 15:02 ` Arnd Bergmann 2016-09-19 15:53 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-10-03 0:25 ` Olof Johansson 2016-10-03 7:48 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-10-03 12:19 ` Kukjin Kim 2016-10-11 0:46 ` Kukjin Kim 2016-10-11 0:58 ` Kukjin Kim 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 2/3] ARM: dts: exynos: DT for v4.9, second round Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-19 15:46 ` Arnd Bergmann 2016-09-18 16:39 ` [GIT PULL 3/3] ARM: dts: exynos: pinctrl cleanup for v4.9 Krzysztof Kozlowski 2016-09-19 15:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).