Message-id: <57BD98DA.7020901@samsung.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2016 21:53:46 +0900
From:   Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
To:     Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozłowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
        "sw0312.kim" <sw0312.kim@...sung.com>,
        Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@...sung.com>,
        InKi Dae <inki.dae@...sung.com>,
        Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>,
        Beomho Seo <beomho.seo@...sung.com>, jaewon02.kim@...sung.com,
        human.hwang@...sung.com, Inha Song <ideal.song@...sung.com>,
        ingi2.kim@...sung.com, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        chanwoo@...nel.org, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] pinctrl: samsung: Add GPFx support of Exynos5433

Hi Tomasz,

I'm sorry for delay reply.

On 2016년 08월 19일 20:31, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Chanwoo,
> 
> 2016-08-19 18:07 GMT+09:00 Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>:
>> Hi Tomasz Figa,
>>
>> Due to wrong setting of email client,
>> your reply is deleted on my email client at the company.
> 
> I used Gmail (in plain text mode) to reply, was that related?

The mistake depend on my filer setting of mail client.

> 
>> I'm so sorry. So, I add your comment on below and then
>> I reply the detailed description.
> 
> No problem. Thanks for description.
> 
>>
>> On 2016년 08월 16일 15:27, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>> From: Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@...sung.com>
>>>
>>> This patch add the support of GPFx pin of Exynos5433 SoC. Exynos5433 has
>>> different memory map of GPFx from previous Exynos SoC. Exynos GPIO has
>>> following register to control gpio funciton. Usually, all registers of GPIO
>>> are included in same domain.
>>> - CON / DAT / PUD / DRV / CONPDN / PUDPDN
>>> - EINT_CON/ EINT_FLTCON0, EINT_FLTCON1 / EINT_MASK / EINT_PEND
>>>
>>> But, GPFx are included in two domain as following. So, this patch supports
>>> the GPFx pin which handle the on separate two domains.
>>> - ALIVE domain : CON / DAT / PUD / DRV / CONPDN / PUDPDN
>>> - IMEM domain  : EINT_CON/ EINT_FLTCON0, EINT_FLTCON1 / EINT_MASK / EINT_PEND
>>
>> ---------
>> I'm afraid I don't get anything from the description above. Could you
>> describe the layout of registers in memory map and IRQ routing of the
>> pins?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Tomasz
>> ----------
>>
>> On this patch, I'm sorry that I described the wrong information about GFP1~5.
>> I explained the memory map of GPF[1-5] the oppositely. Following compositions
>> are correct.
>> - ALIVE : WEINT_FLTCONx, WEINT_MASK, WEING_PEND
>> - IMEM : CON, DAT, PUD, DRV, CONPDN, PUDPDN
>> And, I add the memory map for GPF[1~5][2] and the wakeup interrupt information[1].
>>
>> [1] Memory map for GPF1~5
>> [ALIVE]
>> WEINT_GPA0_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x0700 = 0x0700 + 0x0)
>> WEINT_GPA1_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x0704 = 0x0700 + 0x4)
>> WEINT_GPA2_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x0708 = 0x0700 + 0x8)
>> WEINT_GPA3_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x070C = 0x0700 + 0xC)
>>
>> WEINT_GPF1_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x1704 = 0x0700 + 0x1004)
>> WEINT_GPF2_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x1708 = 0x0700 + 0x1008)
>> WEINT_GPF3_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x170C = 0x0700 + 0x100C)
>> WEINT_GPF4_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x1710 = 0x0700 + 0x10010)
>> WEINT_GPF5_CON         : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x1714 = 0x0700 + 0x1014)
>>
>> WEINT_GPF[x]_MASK     : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x1900 + (x * 4))
>> WEINT_GPF[x]_PEND     : 0x1058_0000 (ALIVE) + (0x1A00 + (x * 4))
>> (x : 1 ~ 5)
>>
>> [IMEM]
>> GPF1_CON          : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0020
>> GPF1_DAT           : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0024
>> GPF1_PUD          : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0028
>> GPF1_DRV          : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x002C
>> GPF1_CONPDN  : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0030
>> GPF1_PUDPDN  : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0034
>>
>> GPF2_CON         : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0040
>> ...
>> GPF3_CON         : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0060
>> ...
>> GPF4_CON         : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x0080
>> ...
>> GPF5_CON         : 0X1109_0000 (IMEM) + 0x00A0
>>
>> [2] Interrput pin information
>> - the total number of wakeup external IRQ is 64.
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> domain| gpio : nr  | wakeup interrput name   | SPI number       |
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ALIVE | GPA0 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT[0~7]     | SPI[0] ~ SPI[7]   |
>> ALIVE | GPA1 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT[8~15]   | SPI[8] ~ SPI[15] |
>> ALIVE | GPA2 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> ALIVE | GPA3 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ALIVE | GPF1 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> ALIVE | GPF2 : 4 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> ALIVE | GPF3 : 4 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> ALIVE | GPF4 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> ALIVE | GPF5 : 8 | INTREQ__EINT_16_63 | SPI[16]               |
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> In summary,
>> If gpf[1-5] handle the CON/DAT/PUD/DRV register,
>> the driver will use the drvdata->ext_base (IMEM base address)
>> instead of drvdata->virt_base(ALIVE base address)
>> because the CON/DAT/PUD/DRV register of gpf[1-5] are included
>> in the IMEM domain.
>>
>> If gpf[1-5] handle the WEINT_* register,
>> the driver will use the drvdata->virt_base(ALIVE base address)
>> because the WEINT_* registers of gpf[1-5] are included in the ALIVE domain.
> 
> Okay, so Krzysztof's suggestion doesn't apply because it's not the
> eint base which is displaced, but the pinctrl base. I'd suggest the
> following solution then:
> 
> - make samsung_pinctrl_drv_data::virt_base an array and save there all
> mapped iomem resources,
> 
> - add unsigned pctl_base_res_idx to samsung_pin_bank_data that would
> be the index of iomem resource into which the
> samsung_pin_bank_data::pctl_offset is an offfset, Existing
> EXYNOS_PIN_BANK* macros don't need to be changed, because the field
> would be 0 by default. Then only the new bank type macro would have
> another argument that would be the resource index,
> 
> - replace samsung_pin_bank::pctl_offset with void __iomem *pctl_base
> and precalculate the addresses at probe time for each bank (pctl_base
> = virt_base[pctl_base_res_idx] + samsung_pin_bank_data::pctl_offset).
> Since currently there is only a problem with pctl_base and eint_base
> seems to be only one, EINT code can simply use virt_base[0] all the
> time for now.
> 
> Also you should document the second regs entry in the DT binding.
> 
> What do you think?

I understand. I suggest the one thing.

I think that we need to add the 'eint_base_idx'
for WEINT registers which is handled on pinctrl-exynos.c
because the composition of gpio registers might be exchanged
against the Exynos5433's GPFx.

"drvdata->virt_base[pctl_res_idx]" will be used on pinctrl-samsung.c.
"drvdata->virt_base[eint_res_idx]" will be used on pinctrl-exynos.c.

As your suggestion, I make a patch and this patch is well working.
I'll send the new patch for samsung pinctrl driver on v2 patchset.

-- 
Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

Powered by blists - more mailing lists