lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4b17cace-09d5-af8c-6e7f-9358cfdceb4d@ti.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Sep 2020 13:07:33 +0530
From:   Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To:     Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
CC:     Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j721e-main: Add PCIe device
 tree nodes

Hi Rob,

On 02/09/20 10:24 am, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi Nishanth,
> 
> On 01/09/20 8:22 pm, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> On 19:36-20200901, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>>> Add PCIe device tree node (both RC and EP) for the four
>>> PCIe instances here.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi | 218 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi      |   5 +-
>>>   2 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>>
>> Did you look at the diff of the dtbs_check before and after this
>> series? I see: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/9fyfrTjx9M/
> 
> I didn't see any errors when I checked for individual bindings
> a0393678@...93678-ssd:~/repos/linux$ mkconfig64 dtbs_check 
> DT_SCHEMA_FILES="Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-ep.yaml" 
> 
>    SCHEMA  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema.yaml
>    DTC     arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
>    DTC     arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
>    CHECK   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
>    CHECK   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
> a0393678@...93678-ssd:~/repos/linux$ mkconfig64 dtbs_check 
> DT_SCHEMA_FILES="Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml" 
> 
>    SCHEMA  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema.yaml
>    DTC     arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
>    DTC     arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
>    CHECK   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
>    CHECK   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml

Can you give hint on why I get ranges is too long error
https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/cPm2tg3dcV/ which I give mkconfig64 
dtbs_check but don't see an error when I include "DT_SCHEMA_FILES"?

Thanks
Kishon

>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi 
>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
>>> index 00a36a14efe7..a36909d8b8c3 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
>>> @@ -28,6 +28,26 @@
>>>           #size-cells = <1>;
>>>           ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x00100000 0x1c000>;
>>> +        pcie0_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@...0 {
>> https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/releases/download/v0.3/devicetree-specification-v0.3.pdf 
>>
>> Section 2.2.2: why not use syscon@...0 and so on?
> 
> okay, will change to generic name.
>>
>>> +            compatible = "syscon";
>>> +            reg = <0x00004070 0x4>;
>>> +        };
>>> +
>>> +        pcie1_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@...4 {
>>> +            compatible = "syscon";
>>> +            reg = <0x00004074 0x4>;
>>> +        };
>>> +
>>> +        pcie2_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@...8 {
>>> +            compatible = "syscon";
>>> +            reg = <0x00004078 0x4>;
>>> +        };
>>> +
>>> +        pcie3_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@...c {
>>> +            compatible = "syscon";
>>> +            reg = <0x0000407c 0x4>;
>>> +        };
>>> +
>>>           serdes_ln_ctrl: serdes-ln-ctrl@...0 {
>>>               compatible = "mmio-mux";
>>>               reg = <0x00004080 0x50>;
>>> @@ -576,6 +596,204 @@
>>>           };
>>>       };
>>> +    pcie0_rc: pcie@...0000 {
>>> +        compatible = "ti,j721e-pcie-host";
>>> +        reg = <0x00 0x02900000 0x00 0x1000>,
>>> +              <0x00 0x02907000 0x00 0x400>,
>>> +              <0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x00800000>,
>>> +              <0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x00001000>;
>>> +        reg-names = "intd_cfg", "user_cfg", "reg", "cfg";
>>> +        interrupt-names = "link_state";
>>> +        interrupts = <GIC_SPI 318 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>>> +        device_type = "pci";
>>> +        ti,syscon-pcie-ctrl = <&pcie0_ctrl>;
>>> +        max-link-speed = <3>;
>>> +        num-lanes = <2>;
>>> +        power-domains = <&k3_pds 239 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>;
>>> +        clocks = <&k3_clks 239 1>;
>>> +        clock-names = "fck";
>>> +        #address-cells = <3>;
>>> +        #size-cells = <2>;
>>> +        bus-range = <0x0 0xf>;
>>> +        vendor-id = <0x104c>;
>>> +        device-id = <0xb00d>;
>>> +        msi-map = <0x0 &gic_its 0x0 0x10000>;
>>> +        dma-coherent;
>>> +        ranges = <0x01000000 0x0 0x10001000 0x0 0x10001000 0x0 
>>> 0x0010000>,
>>> +             <0x02000000 0x0 0x10011000 0x0 0x10011000 0x0 0x7fef000>;
>>> +        dma-ranges = <0x02000000 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x10000 0x0>;
>>> +    };
>>> +
>>> +    pcie0_ep: pcie-ep@...0000 {
>> Not related to this patch, but just a suggestion: pcie-ep -> do we
>> need to add that to the Generic names in DT spec?
>>
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi 
>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
>>> index f787aa73aaae..eeb02115b966 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
>>> @@ -132,9 +132,12 @@
>>>                <0x00 0x06400000 0x00 0x06400000 0x00 0x00400000>, /* 
>>> USBSS1 */
>>>                <0x00 0x01000000 0x00 0x01000000 0x00 0x0af02400>, /* 
>>> Most peripherals */
>>>                <0x00 0x30000000 0x00 0x30000000 0x00 0x0c400000>, /* 
>>> MAIN NAVSS */
>>> -             <0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x01000000>, /* 
>>> PCIe Core*/
>>> +             <0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x01800000>, /* 
>>> PCIe Core*/
>>> +             <0x00 0x0e000000 0x00 0x0e000000 0x00 0x01800000>, /* 
>>> PCIe Core*/
>>>                <0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x10000000>, /* 
>>> PCIe DAT */
>>                                         ^^
>>                                     should be PCIe1?
>> Just because you are introducing PCIe2,3 in this patch, the net result
>> does'nt look consistent? Also might want to cover this change in the
>> $commit_message.
> 
> yeah, we could have a separate patch for this change.
> 
> Thanks
> Kishon
> 
>> [...]
>>>                <0x00 0x64800000 0x00 0x64800000 0x00 0x00800000>, /* 
>>> C71 */
>>> +             <0x44 0x00000000 0x44 0x00000000 0x00 0x08000000>, /* 
>>> PCIe2 DAT */
>>> +             <0x44 0x10000000 0x44 0x10000000 0x00 0x08000000>, /* 
>>> PCIe3 DAT */
>>>                <0x4d 0x80800000 0x4d 0x80800000 0x00 0x00800000>, /* 
>>> C66_0 */
>>>                <0x4d 0x81800000 0x4d 0x81800000 0x00 0x00800000>, /* 
>>> C66_1 */
>>>                <0x4e 0x20000000 0x4e 0x20000000 0x00 0x00080000>, /* 
>>> GPU */
>>> -- 
>>> 2.17.1
>>>
>>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ