[PATCH v5 0/2] Implement SoC bus support for Vybrid

[PATCH v5 0/2] Implement SoC bus support for Vybrid

[Sanchayan Maity]

Hello,

This patchset implements SoC bus support for Freescale Vybrid platform,
implementing the following
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-devices-soc
and is the fifth revision. Tested on a Colibri VF61 module after
rebasing on shawn's for-next branch.

Arnd and Shawn I did like to have your comments to get this in a
mergeable state and make any changes as necessary and required.

Thanks for the comments and feedback till now. Feedback is most
welcome.

Version 4 of the patchset can be found here
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/26/199

Version 3 of the patchset can be found here
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg420847.html

Version 2 of the patchset can be found here
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg80654.html

Version 1 of the patchset can be found here
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg80257.html

The RFC version can be found here
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/11/13

Changes since v4:
- Use devm_* family of functions and use a struct to get rid of
  global variables (suggested by Joachim Eastwood)
- Make Kconfig govern the compilation with tristate, instead of
  earlier bool. Paul Bolle raised a valid point that perhaps this
  should have been built in with the bool, however I had not taken
  into consideration generic distro kernels and it makes sense to
  have this tristated. (comments from Paul Bolle and Andreas Farber)

Changes since v3:
- Instead of using the syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible function
  use a phandle in the device tree along with offsets specified in
  this phandle node and then read the offset along with the device
  node in the driver for reading from the required region.

Changes since v2:
- Implement the SoC bus code as a driver in drivers/soc
  by registering with fsl,mscm-cpucfg as per Arnd's feedback

Changes since v1:
- Sort the headers in alphabetical order

Changes since RFC:
- Use a DT entry for the ROM area while specifying it as syscon.

Notes same since v1:
Currently the required information is more or less read across the whole
SoC, but I guess we cannot change that since these are the locations
with the required information.

There seem to be three options for the revision field:
- ROM revision (see https://community.freescale.com/docs/DOC-94802)
- ANADIG revision (ANADIG_DIGIPROC, as used for the i.MX SoC's)
- OCOTP revision

Some numbers:

Colibri VF61 1.1A (2N02G)
- 0x00000013
- 0x00610000
- 0x01000000
- 0x410000c8

Colibri VF61 V1.0B (1N02G)
- 0x00000011
- 0x00610000
- 0x01000000
- 0x410000c8

Colibri VF61 V1.0A (which is actually a VF600 SoC, no L2 cache, since
that was the only one we could buy back then, 1N02G printed on it)
- 0x00000011
- 0x00610000
- 0x01000000
- none...

Colibri VF50 V1.0A (1N02G)
- 0x00000011
- 0x00610000
- 0x01000000
- none...

Vybrid Tower Rev J (1N02G)
- 0x00000011
- 0x00610000
- 0x01000000
- 0x410000c8

The ROM revision differs the most, so we would like to go with the
revision information from the ROM register 0x80.

Sanchayan Maity (2):
  ARM: dts: vfxxx: Add OCOTP and OCROM nodes
  soc: Add driver for Freescale Vybrid Platform

 arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi |  12 ++++
 drivers/soc/Kconfig          |   1 +
 drivers/soc/Makefile         |   1 +
 drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig      |  10 +++
 drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile     |   1 +
 drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c  | 166 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 6 files changed, 191 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c

-- 
2.4.2

[PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: dts: vfxxx: Add OCOTP and OCROM nodes

[Sanchayan Maity]

Add a device tree node for the On-Chip One Time Programmable
Controller (OCOTP) and the On-Chip ROM.

Signed-off-by: Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@gmail.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
index 2f4b04d..ed9b6b8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
@@ -56,6 +56,13 @@
 		compatible = "simple-bus";
 		interrupt-parent = <&mscm_ir>;
 		ranges;
+		ocotp-cfg = <&ocotp 0x410 0x420>;
+		rom-revision = <&ocrom 0x80>;
+
+		ocrom: ocrom {
+			compatible = "fsl,vf610-ocrom", "syscon";
+			reg = <0x00000000 0x18000>;
+		};
 
 		aips0: aips-bus@40000000 {
 			compatible = "fsl,aips-bus", "simple-bus";
@@ -403,6 +410,11 @@
 				status = "disabled";
 			};
 
+			ocotp: ocotp@400a5000 {
+				compatible = "fsl,vf610-ocotp", "syscon";
+				reg = <0x400a5000 0x1000>;
+			};
+
 			snvs0: snvs@400a7000 {
 			    compatible = "fsl,sec-v4.0-mon", "simple-bus";
 				#address-cells = <1>;
-- 
2.4.2

[PATCH v5 2/2] soc: Add driver for Freescale Vybrid Platform

[Sanchayan Maity]

This adds a SoC driver to be used by the Freescale Vybrid SoC's.
We create the "fsl" directory for holding the different Freescale
designs. Driver utilises syscon to get the various register values
needed. After this sysfs exposes some SoC specific properties as
below:

> cd /sys/devices/soc0
> ls
family     machine    power      revision   soc_id     subsystem  uevent
> cat family
Freescale Vybrid VF610
> cat machine
Freescale Vybrid
> cat revision
00000013
> cat soc_id
df6472a60c1c39d4

Signed-off-by: Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/soc/Kconfig         |   1 +
 drivers/soc/Makefile        |   1 +
 drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig     |  10 +++
 drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile    |   1 +
 drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c | 166 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 179 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile
 create mode 100644 drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c

diff --git a/drivers/soc/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
index d8bde82..8b4dd2b 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/soc/Kconfig
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 menu "SOC (System On Chip) specific Drivers"
 
+source "drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig"
 source "drivers/soc/mediatek/Kconfig"
 source "drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig"
 source "drivers/soc/ti/Kconfig"
diff --git a/drivers/soc/Makefile b/drivers/soc/Makefile
index 70042b2..142676e 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/soc/Makefile
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
 # Makefile for the Linux Kernel SOC specific device drivers.
 #
 
+obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_VF610)        += fsl/
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MEDIATEK)	+= mediatek/
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)		+= qcom/
 obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA)	+= tegra/
diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig b/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5752f77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+#
+# Freescale SoC drivers
+
+config SOC_BUS_VF610
+	   tristate "SoC bus device for the Freescale Vybrid platform"
+	   depends on SOC_VF610
+	   select SOC_BUS
+	   help
+	     Include support for the SoC bus on the Freescale Vybrid platform
+		 providing some sysfs information about the module variant.
diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile b/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3d6b331
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_BUS_VF610)		+= soc-vf610.o
diff --git a/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c b/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d66360e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c
@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
+/*
+ * Copyright 2015 Toradex AG
+ *
+ * Author: Sanchayan Maity <sanchayan.maity@toradex.com>
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2, as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation.
+ *
+ */
+
+#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
+#include <linux/of_platform.h>
+#include <linux/regmap.h>
+#include <linux/random.h>
+#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/sys_soc.h>
+
+#define DRIVER_NAME "vf610-soc-bus"
+
+#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET   0x0000002C
+#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET    0x00000014
+
+struct vf610_soc {
+	struct device *dev;
+	struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
+	struct soc_device *soc_dev;
+};
+
+static int vf610_soc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	struct vf610_soc *info;
+	struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap;
+	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+	struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
+	struct device_node *soc_node;
+	struct of_phandle_args pargs;
+	char soc_type[] = "xx0";
+	u32 cfg0_offset, cfg1_offset, rom_rev_offset;
+	u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev;
+	u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1;
+	u64 soc_id;
+	int ret;
+
+	info = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct vf610_soc), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!info)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	info->dev = &pdev->dev;
+	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, info);
+
+	mscm_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(node);
+	if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) {
+		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for mscm failed\n");
+		return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap);
+	}
+
+	soc_node = of_find_node_by_path("/soc");
+
+	ret = of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(soc_node,
+					"ocotp-cfg", 2, 0, &pargs);
+	if (ret) {
+		dev_err(dev, "lookup failed for ocotp-cfg node %d\n", ret);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	ocotp_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pargs.np);
+	if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) {
+		of_node_put(pargs.np);
+		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for ocotp failed\n");
+		return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap);
+	}
+
+	cfg0_offset = pargs.args[0];
+	cfg1_offset = pargs.args[1];
+	of_node_put(pargs.np);
+
+	ret = of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(soc_node,
+					"rom-revision", 1, 0, &pargs);
+	if (ret) {
+		dev_err(dev, "lookup failed for rom-revision node %d\n", ret);
+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	rom_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pargs.np);
+	if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) {
+		of_node_put(pargs.np);
+		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for ocrom failed\n");
+		return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap);
+	}
+
+	rom_rev_offset = pargs.args[0];
+	of_node_put(pargs.np);
+
+	ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, cfg0_offset, &soc_id1);
+	if (ret)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, cfg1_offset, &soc_id2);
+	if (ret)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	soc_id = (u64) soc_id1 << 32 | soc_id2;
+	add_device_randomness(&soc_id, sizeof(soc_id));
+
+	ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET, &cpxcount);
+	if (ret)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET, &cpxcfg1);
+	if (ret)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	soc_type[0] = cpxcount ? '6' : '5'; /* Dual Core => VF6x0 */
+	soc_type[1] = cpxcfg1 ? '1' : '0'; /* L2 Cache => VFx10 */
+
+	ret = regmap_read(rom_regmap, rom_rev_offset, &rom_rev);
+	if (ret)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	info->soc_dev_attr = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
+				sizeof(info->soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!info->soc_dev_attr)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	info->soc_dev_attr->machine = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
+				GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid");
+	info->soc_dev_attr->soc_id = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
+				GFP_KERNEL, "%016llx", soc_id);
+	info->soc_dev_attr->family = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
+				GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid VF%s",
+				soc_type);
+	info->soc_dev_attr->revision = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
+				GFP_KERNEL, "%08x", rom_rev);
+
+	info->soc_dev = soc_device_register(info->soc_dev_attr);
+	if (IS_ERR(info->soc_dev))
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int vf610_soc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	struct vf610_soc *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+
+	if (info->soc_dev)
+		soc_device_unregister(info->soc_dev);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = {
+	{ .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", },
+	{ /* sentinel */ }
+};
+
+static struct platform_driver vf610_soc_driver = {
+	.probe          = vf610_soc_probe,
+	.remove         = vf610_soc_remove,
+	.driver         = {
+		.name   = DRIVER_NAME,
+		.of_match_table = vf610_soc_bus_match,
+	},
+};
+module_platform_driver(vf610_soc_driver);
-- 
2.4.2

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] soc: Add driver for Freescale Vybrid Platform

[Paul Bolle]

On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 14:52 +0530, Sanchayan Maity wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig

> +config SOC_BUS_VF610
> +	   tristate "SoC bus device for the Freescale Vybrid platform"
> +	   depends on SOC_VF610
> +	   select SOC_BUS
> +	   help
> +	     Include support for the SoC bus on the Freescale Vybrid platform
> +		 providing some sysfs information about the module variant.

> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile

> +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_BUS_VF610)		+= soc-vf610.o

> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright 2015 Toradex AG
> + *
> + * Author: Sanchayan Maity <sanchayan.maity@toradex.com>
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2, as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> +#include <linux/random.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/sys_soc.h>
> +
> +#define DRIVER_NAME "vf610-soc-bus"
> +
> +#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET   0x0000002C
> +#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET    0x00000014
> +
> +struct vf610_soc {
> +	struct device *dev;
> +	struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
> +	struct soc_device *soc_dev;
> +};
> +
> +static int vf610_soc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct vf610_soc *info;
> +	struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap;
> +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +	struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> +	struct device_node *soc_node;
> +	struct of_phandle_args pargs;
> +	char soc_type[] = "xx0";
> +	u32 cfg0_offset, cfg1_offset, rom_rev_offset;
> +	u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev;
> +	u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1;
> +	u64 soc_id;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	info = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct vf610_soc), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!info)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	info->dev = &pdev->dev;
> +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, info);
> +
> +	mscm_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(node);
> +	if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for mscm failed\n");
> +		return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap);
> +	}
> +
> +	soc_node = of_find_node_by_path("/soc");
> +
> +	ret = of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(soc_node,
> +					"ocotp-cfg", 2, 0, &pargs);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "lookup failed for ocotp-cfg node %d\n", ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	ocotp_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pargs.np);
> +	if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) {
> +		of_node_put(pargs.np);
> +		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for ocotp failed\n");
> +		return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap);
> +	}
> +
> +	cfg0_offset = pargs.args[0];
> +	cfg1_offset = pargs.args[1];
> +	of_node_put(pargs.np);
> +
> +	ret = of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(soc_node,
> +					"rom-revision", 1, 0, &pargs);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "lookup failed for rom-revision node %d\n", ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	rom_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pargs.np);
> +	if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) {
> +		of_node_put(pargs.np);
> +		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for ocrom failed\n");
> +		return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap);
> +	}
> +
> +	rom_rev_offset = pargs.args[0];
> +	of_node_put(pargs.np);
> +
> +	ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, cfg0_offset, &soc_id1);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, cfg1_offset, &soc_id2);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	soc_id = (u64) soc_id1 << 32 | soc_id2;
> +	add_device_randomness(&soc_id, sizeof(soc_id));
> +
> +	ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET, &cpxcount);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET, &cpxcfg1);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	soc_type[0] = cpxcount ? '6' : '5'; /* Dual Core => VF6x0 */
> +	soc_type[1] = cpxcfg1 ? '1' : '0'; /* L2 Cache => VFx10 */
> +
> +	ret = regmap_read(rom_regmap, rom_rev_offset, &rom_rev);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	info->soc_dev_attr = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
> +				sizeof(info->soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!info->soc_dev_attr)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	info->soc_dev_attr->machine = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> +				GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid");
> +	info->soc_dev_attr->soc_id = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> +				GFP_KERNEL, "%016llx", soc_id);
> +	info->soc_dev_attr->family = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> +				GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid VF%s",
> +				soc_type);
> +	info->soc_dev_attr->revision = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> +				GFP_KERNEL, "%08x", rom_rev);
> +
> +	info->soc_dev = soc_device_register(info->soc_dev_attr);
> +	if (IS_ERR(info->soc_dev))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int vf610_soc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct vf610_soc *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +	if (info->soc_dev)
> +		soc_device_unregister(info->soc_dev);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", },
> +	{ /* sentinel */ }
> +};
> +
> +static struct platform_driver vf610_soc_driver = {
> +	.probe          = vf610_soc_probe,
> +	.remove         = vf610_soc_remove,
> +	.driver         = {
> +		.name   = DRIVER_NAME,
> +		.of_match_table = vf610_soc_bus_match,
> +	},
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(vf610_soc_driver);

The Kconfig symbol is tristate now, but all module specific code is gone
from this file (ie, MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE, MODULE_DESCRIPTION and
MODULE_LICENSE). Why's that?

Thanks,


Paul Bolle

Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: dts: vfxxx: Add OCOTP and OCROM nodes

[Maxime Ripard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1064 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:52:37PM +0530, Sanchayan Maity wrote:
> Add a device tree node for the On-Chip One Time Programmable
> Controller (OCOTP) and the On-Chip ROM.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@gmail.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> index 2f4b04d..ed9b6b8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> @@ -56,6 +56,13 @@
>  		compatible = "simple-bus";
>  		interrupt-parent = <&mscm_ir>;
>  		ranges;
> +		ocotp-cfg = <&ocotp 0x410 0x420>;
> +		rom-revision = <&ocrom 0x80>;
> +
> +		ocrom: ocrom {
> +			compatible = "fsl,vf610-ocrom", "syscon";
> +			reg = <0x00000000 0x18000>;
> +		};

Shouldn't that use the new nvmem framework currently being discussed,
instead of defining custom bindings?

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: dts: vfxxx: Add OCOTP and OCROM nodes

[maitysanchayan]

Hello Maxime,

On 15-06-06 13:58:33, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 02:52:37PM +0530, Sanchayan Maity wrote:
> > Add a device tree node for the On-Chip One Time Programmable
> > Controller (OCOTP) and the On-Chip ROM.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> > index 2f4b04d..ed9b6b8 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> > @@ -56,6 +56,13 @@
> >  		compatible = "simple-bus";
> >  		interrupt-parent = <&mscm_ir>;
> >  		ranges;
> > +		ocotp-cfg = <&ocotp 0x410 0x420>;
> > +		rom-revision = <&ocrom 0x80>;
> > +
> > +		ocrom: ocrom {
> > +			compatible = "fsl,vf610-ocrom", "syscon";
> > +			reg = <0x00000000 0x18000>;
> > +		};
> 
> Shouldn't that use the new nvmem framework currently being discussed,
> instead of defining custom bindings?

I am aware of those nvmem framework patches by Srinivas, however from what
I can see that framework has not been merged yet atleast from the mail
chain that I see for v5 of the patchset so I have not properly looked into
that. Mark Brown did apply the regmap patches to his tree, but has the rest
of the framework been merged or is it expected to be merged?

If it is expected to be merged and if that framework is a fit for what we
are trying to do here and it seems so on a quick glance, then I can go with
that. However I still did like to hear from Arnd or have some more comments
before I go for that approach with the next respin.

- Sanchayan

Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] soc: Add driver for Freescale Vybrid Platform

[maitysanchayan]

Hello Paul,

On 15-06-06 12:26:07, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 14:52 +0530, Sanchayan Maity wrote:
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Kconfig
> 
> > +config SOC_BUS_VF610
> > +	   tristate "SoC bus device for the Freescale Vybrid platform"
> > +	   depends on SOC_VF610
> > +	   select SOC_BUS
> > +	   help
> > +	     Include support for the SoC bus on the Freescale Vybrid platform
> > +		 providing some sysfs information about the module variant.
> 
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/Makefile
> 
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_BUS_VF610)		+= soc-vf610.o
> 
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/fsl/soc-vf610.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright 2015 Toradex AG
> > + *
> > + * Author: Sanchayan Maity <sanchayan.maity@toradex.com>
> > + *
> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2, as
> > + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > + *
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> > +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> > +#include <linux/random.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > +#include <linux/sys_soc.h>
> > +
> > +#define DRIVER_NAME "vf610-soc-bus"
> > +
> > +#define MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET   0x0000002C
> > +#define MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET    0x00000014
> > +
> > +struct vf610_soc {
> > +	struct device *dev;
> > +	struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
> > +	struct soc_device *soc_dev;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int vf610_soc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct vf610_soc *info;
> > +	struct regmap *ocotp_regmap, *mscm_regmap, *rom_regmap;
> > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +	struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > +	struct device_node *soc_node;
> > +	struct of_phandle_args pargs;
> > +	char soc_type[] = "xx0";
> > +	u32 cfg0_offset, cfg1_offset, rom_rev_offset;
> > +	u32 soc_id1, soc_id2, rom_rev;
> > +	u32 cpxcount, cpxcfg1;
> > +	u64 soc_id;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	info = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct vf610_soc), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!info)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +	info->dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, info);
> > +
> > +	mscm_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(node);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(mscm_regmap)) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for mscm failed\n");
> > +		return PTR_ERR(mscm_regmap);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	soc_node = of_find_node_by_path("/soc");
> > +
> > +	ret = of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(soc_node,
> > +					"ocotp-cfg", 2, 0, &pargs);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "lookup failed for ocotp-cfg node %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	ocotp_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pargs.np);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(ocotp_regmap)) {
> > +		of_node_put(pargs.np);
> > +		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for ocotp failed\n");
> > +		return PTR_ERR(ocotp_regmap);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	cfg0_offset = pargs.args[0];
> > +	cfg1_offset = pargs.args[1];
> > +	of_node_put(pargs.np);
> > +
> > +	ret = of_parse_phandle_with_fixed_args(soc_node,
> > +					"rom-revision", 1, 0, &pargs);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "lookup failed for rom-revision node %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	rom_regmap = syscon_node_to_regmap(pargs.np);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(rom_regmap)) {
> > +		of_node_put(pargs.np);
> > +		dev_err(dev, "regmap lookup for ocrom failed\n");
> > +		return PTR_ERR(rom_regmap);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	rom_rev_offset = pargs.args[0];
> > +	of_node_put(pargs.np);
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, cfg0_offset, &soc_id1);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_read(ocotp_regmap, cfg1_offset, &soc_id2);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	soc_id = (u64) soc_id1 << 32 | soc_id2;
> > +	add_device_randomness(&soc_id, sizeof(soc_id));
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCOUNT_OFFSET, &cpxcount);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_read(mscm_regmap, MSCM_CPxCFG1_OFFSET, &cpxcfg1);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	soc_type[0] = cpxcount ? '6' : '5'; /* Dual Core => VF6x0 */
> > +	soc_type[1] = cpxcfg1 ? '1' : '0'; /* L2 Cache => VFx10 */
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_read(rom_regmap, rom_rev_offset, &rom_rev);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	info->soc_dev_attr = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
> > +				sizeof(info->soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!info->soc_dev_attr)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +	info->soc_dev_attr->machine = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> > +				GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid");
> > +	info->soc_dev_attr->soc_id = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> > +				GFP_KERNEL, "%016llx", soc_id);
> > +	info->soc_dev_attr->family = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> > +				GFP_KERNEL, "Freescale Vybrid VF%s",
> > +				soc_type);
> > +	info->soc_dev_attr->revision = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev,
> > +				GFP_KERNEL, "%08x", rom_rev);
> > +
> > +	info->soc_dev = soc_device_register(info->soc_dev_attr);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(info->soc_dev))
> > +		return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int vf610_soc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct vf610_soc *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > +
> > +	if (info->soc_dev)
> > +		soc_device_unregister(info->soc_dev);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id vf610_soc_bus_match[] = {
> > +	{ .compatible = "fsl,vf610-mscm-cpucfg", },
> > +	{ /* sentinel */ }
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct platform_driver vf610_soc_driver = {
> > +	.probe          = vf610_soc_probe,
> > +	.remove         = vf610_soc_remove,
> > +	.driver         = {
> > +		.name   = DRIVER_NAME,
> > +		.of_match_table = vf610_soc_bus_match,
> > +	},
> > +};
> > +module_platform_driver(vf610_soc_driver);
> 
> The Kconfig symbol is tristate now, but all module specific code is gone
> from this file (ie, MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE, MODULE_DESCRIPTION and
> MODULE_LICENSE). Why's that?

Sorry that this crept in. It is a mistake on my part. Will fix.

Thank you for the feedback.

- Sanchayan.

Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: dts: vfxxx: Add OCOTP and OCROM nodes

[Maxime Ripard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2201 bytes --]

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 10:07:53AM +0530, maitysanchayan@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Add a device tree node for the On-Chip One Time Programmable
> > > Controller (OCOTP) and the On-Chip ROM.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> > > index 2f4b04d..ed9b6b8 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/vfxxx.dtsi
> > > @@ -56,6 +56,13 @@
> > >  		compatible = "simple-bus";
> > >  		interrupt-parent = <&mscm_ir>;
> > >  		ranges;
> > > +		ocotp-cfg = <&ocotp 0x410 0x420>;
> > > +		rom-revision = <&ocrom 0x80>;
> > > +
> > > +		ocrom: ocrom {
> > > +			compatible = "fsl,vf610-ocrom", "syscon";
> > > +			reg = <0x00000000 0x18000>;
> > > +		};
> > 
> > Shouldn't that use the new nvmem framework currently being discussed,
> > instead of defining custom bindings?
> 
> I am aware of those nvmem framework patches by Srinivas, however from what
> I can see that framework has not been merged yet atleast from the mail
> chain that I see for v5 of the patchset so I have not properly looked into
> that. Mark Brown did apply the regmap patches to his tree, but has the rest
> of the framework been merged or is it expected to be merged?

Yeah, obviously the plan is to get it merged, and there's some effort
toward that, with the amount of review that seem to slow down, so I
guess it's closer to its merge than to its first submission.

> If it is expected to be merged and if that framework is a fit for what we
> are trying to do here and it seems so on a quick glance, then I can go with
> that. However I still did like to hear from Arnd or have some more comments
> before I go for that approach with the next respin.

If it doesn't fit, don't hesitate to mention your concern on the
thread. What you're trying to do should definitely be covered by that
framework.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]