Message-ID: <e98d49c4-78b5-9a49-1f00-a52d20ea3b95@ti.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 May 2021 07:06:44 -0500
From:   Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
CC:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>,
        <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Update bindings
 for AM64x SoCs

On 5/27/21 10:17 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 24 May 10:47 CDT 2021, Suman Anna wrote:
> 
>> On 5/21/21 3:40 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
>>> Hi suman,
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:47:44PM -0500, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>
>>>> On 4/19/21 8:55 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/27/21 9:31 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>>>> The K3 AM64x SoCs have two dual-core Arm R5F clusters/subsystems, with
>>>>>> 2 R5F cores each, both in the MAIN voltage domain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These clusters are a revised IP version compared to those present on
>>>>>> J721E and J7200 SoCs, and supports a new "Single-CPU" mode instead of
>>>>>> LockStep mode. Update the K3 R5F remoteproc bindings with the compatible
>>>>>> info relevant to these R5F clusters/subsystems on K3 AM64x SoCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v2: No changes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  .../bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml  | 31 ++++++++++++++++---
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like this patch has fallen through the cracks, can you please review and
>>>>> give your ack for this patch so that Bjorn can pick up the series for 5.13?
>>>>
>>>> Gentle reminder, do you have any comments on this patch. Appreciate your ack so
>>>> that we can get this in for 5.14?
>>>
>>> If memory serves me well Rob indicated that he would not review or comment on
>>> bindings related to multi-core remote processors.  On the flip side he also
>>> mentioned that he would not object to their presence.  And since this is an
>>> increment to an existing binding rather than a new one, I think it is fair for
>>> us to pick it up.  
>>>
>>> Rob - please intervene if my recollections are not accurate and accept my honest
>>> apologies.  Otherwise: 
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> 
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Mathieu.
>>
>> Bjorn,
>> Is it possible for you to give an immutable branch with just this bindings so we
>> can add the R5F nodes as well and avoid any checkpatch warnings on Nishanth's
>> tree with our K3 dts patches?
>>
> 
> Hi Suman,
> 
> That sounds rather ambitious, but you can now find this at:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andersson/remoteproc.git/tag/?h=20210327143117.1840-2-s-anna@ti.com

Thanks a lot Bjorn. Appreciate this a lot.

regards
Suman

> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
>> regards
>> Suman
>>
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>> Suman
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> regards
>>>>> Suman
>>>>>
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> index d905d614502b..130fbaacc4b1 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -14,8 +14,12 @@ description: |
>>>>>>    processor subsystems/clusters (R5FSS). The dual core cluster can be used
>>>>>>    either in a LockStep mode providing safety/fault tolerance features or in a
>>>>>>    Split mode providing two individual compute cores for doubling the compute
>>>>>> -  capacity. These are used together with other processors present on the SoC
>>>>>> -  to achieve various system level goals.
>>>>>> +  capacity on most SoCs. These are used together with other processors present
>>>>>> +  on the SoC to achieve various system level goals.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +  AM64x SoCs do not support LockStep mode, but rather a new non-safety mode
>>>>>> +  called "Single-CPU" mode, where only Core0 is used, but with ability to use
>>>>>> +  Core1's TCMs as well.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    Each Dual-Core R5F sub-system is represented as a single DTS node
>>>>>>    representing the cluster, with a pair of child DT nodes representing
>>>>>> @@ -33,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>>        - ti,am654-r5fss
>>>>>>        - ti,j721e-r5fss
>>>>>>        - ti,j7200-r5fss
>>>>>> +      - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    power-domains:
>>>>>>      description: |
>>>>>> @@ -56,11 +61,12 @@ properties:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>>      $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>>>>>> -    enum: [0, 1]
>>>>>>      description: |
>>>>>>        Configuration Mode for the Dual R5F cores within the R5F cluster.
>>>>>> -      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode),
>>>>>> -      default is LockStep mode if omitted.
>>>>>> +      Should be either a value of 1 (LockStep mode) or 0 (Split mode) on
>>>>>> +      most SoCs (AM65x, J721E, J7200), default is LockStep mode if omitted;
>>>>>> +      and should be either a value of 0 (Split mode) or 2 (Single-CPU mode)
>>>>>> +      on AM64x SoCs, default is Split mode if omitted.
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  # R5F Processor Child Nodes:
>>>>>>  # ==========================
>>>>>> @@ -97,6 +103,7 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>>>            - ti,am654-r5f
>>>>>>            - ti,j721e-r5f
>>>>>>            - ti,j7200-r5f
>>>>>> +          - ti,am64-r5f
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>        reg:
>>>>>>          items:
>>>>>> @@ -198,6 +205,20 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>      unevaluatedProperties: false
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> +if:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    compatible:
>>>>>> +      enum:
>>>>>> +        - ti,am64-r5fss
>>>>>> +then:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>> +      enum: [0, 2]
>>>>>> +else:
>>>>>> +  properties:
>>>>>> +    ti,cluster-mode:
>>>>>> +      enum: [0, 1]
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>  required:
>>>>>>    - compatible
>>>>>>    - power-domains
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists