| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <e2c081b0-080e-fd96-c277-deec63c5f822@i2se.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2022 12:18:24 +0200
From: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>
To: Ariel D'Alessandro <ariel.dalessandro@...labora.com>
Cc: arnd@...db.de, f.fainelli@...il.com,
krzyszccf.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
olof@...om.net, robh+dt@...nel.org, soc@...nel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, william.zhang@...adcom.com,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: Add Raspberry Pi Compute Module 4 CANOPi Board
Hi Ariel,
Am 16.09.22 um 17:31 schrieb Ariel D'Alessandro:
> The Eclipse KUKSA CANOPi [0] is a baseboard for the Raspberry Compute
> Module 4 (CM4). It contains a VIA VL805 4 Port USB controller and two
> MCP251xFD based CAN-FD interfaces.
this is a cool piece of hardware :-)
Is it correct this baseboard is only intended for Compute Modules
without Wifi/BT? Otherwise we get conflicts with UART0. The
bcm2711-rpi-cm4.dtsi is currently written for all Compute Module
variants. A possible solution is to use delete-node, another cleaner
ones is to split bcm2711-rpi-cm4 into wifi and non-wifi variants and
include the non-wifi one in your case.
>
> [0] https://github.com/boschresearch/kuksa.hardware
>
> Signed-off-by: Ariel D'Alessandro <ariel.dalessandro@...labora.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 1 +
> arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts | 139 ++++++++++++++++++
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/Makefile | 1 +
> .../dts/broadcom/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts | 2 +
> 4 files changed, 143 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts
> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> index 05d8aef6e5d2..8930ab2c132c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> @@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835) += \
> bcm2837-rpi-zero-2-w.dtb \
> bcm2711-rpi-400.dtb \
> bcm2711-rpi-4-b.dtb \
> + bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dtb \
> bcm2711-rpi-cm4-io.dtb \
> bcm2835-rpi-zero.dtb \
> bcm2835-rpi-zero-w.dtb
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..52ec5908883c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/dts-v1/;
> +#include "bcm2711-rpi-cm4.dtsi"
> +
> +/ {
> + model = "Raspberry Pi Compute Module 4 CANOPi Board";
> +
> + clocks {
> + clk_mcp251xfd_osc: mcp251xfd-osc {
> + #clock-cells = <0>;
> + compatible = "fixed-clock";
> + clock-frequency = <20000000>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> + leds {
> + led-act {
> + gpios = <&gpio 42 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> + };
> +
> + led-pwr {
> + label = "PWR";
> + gpios = <&expgpio 2 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> + default-state = "keep";
> + linux,default-trigger = "default-on";
> + };
> + };
are these LEDs really populated and wired to the BCM2711? The schematics
suggests that they are connected to the STN2120.
> +};
> +
> +&ddc0 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&ddc1 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&hdmi0 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&hdmi1 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
I cannot see any graphical interface in the schematics. So why they are
enabled?
> +
> +&i2c0 {
> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> + pinctrl-0 = <&i2c0_gpio44>;
> + status = "okay";
> + clock-frequency = <100000>;
> +
> + pcf85063a@51 {
Please use the actual function for the node name like rtc@51
> + compatible = "nxp,pcf85063a";
> + reg = <0x51>;
> + };
> +};
> +
> +&pcie0 {
> + pci@0,0 {
> + device_type = "pci";
> + #address-cells = <3>;
> + #size-cells = <2>;
> + ranges;
> +
> + reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
> +
> + usb@0,0 {
> + reg = <0 0 0 0 0>;
> + resets = <&reset RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>;
> + };
> + };
> +};
> +
> +&pixelvalve0 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&pixelvalve1 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&pixelvalve2 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&pixelvalve4 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
Without a graphical interface they shouldn't be necessary?
> +
> +&spi {
> + status = "okay";
> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> + pinctrl-0 = <&spi0_gpio7>;
> + cs-gpios = <&gpio 8 1>, <&gpio 7 1>;
> + dmas = <&dma 6>, <&dma 7>;
> + dma-names = "tx", "rx";
> +
> + mcp251xfd0: mcp251xfd@0 {
mcp251xfd0: can@0
> + compatible = "microchip,mcp251xfd";
> + reg = <0>;
> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> + pinctrl-0 = <&mcp251xfd0_pins>;
> + spi-max-frequency = <20000000>;
I wasn't good at physics, but having spi-max-frequency equal to the
oscillator frequency seems wrong. Is it because of the hack in the
downstream kernel which halves the SPI frequency?
Just guessing because imx6qp-prtwd3.dts uses 10 MHz.
> + interrupt-parent = <&gpio>;
> + interrupts = <27 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
> + clocks = <&clk_mcp251xfd_osc>;
> + };
> +
> + mcp251xfd1: mcp251xfd@1 {
mcp251xfd1: can@1
> + compatible = "microchip,mcp251xfd";
> + reg = <1>;
> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> + pinctrl-0 = <&mcp251xfd1_pins>;
> + spi-max-frequency = <20000000>;
> + interrupt-parent = <&gpio>;
> + interrupts = <22 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
> + clocks = <&clk_mcp251xfd_osc>;
> + };
> +};
> +
> +&gpio {
In case there are any GPIOs which should be controlled via user space
(like LTE or FAN control), it would be nice to describe them via
gpio-line-names.
> + mcp251xfd0_pins: mcp251xfd0_pins {
> + brcm,pins = <27>;
> + brcm,function = <BCM2835_FSEL_GPIO_IN>;
> + };
The vendor specific pin properties are deprecated for BCM2711. We have
generic ones for this:
mcp251xfd0_pins: mcp251xfd0_pins {
pin-irq {
pins = "gpio27";
function = "gpio_in";
};
};
> +
> + mcp251xfd1_pins: mcp251xfd1_pins {
> + brcm,pins = <22>;
> + brcm,function = <BCM2835_FSEL_GPIO_IN>;
> + };
dito
> +};
> +
> +&vc4 {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
I think this is also not necessary for a headless device.
> +
> +&vec {
> + status = "disabled";
> +};
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/Makefile
> index e8584d3b698f..7cd88b8c0345 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/Makefile
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835) += bcm2711-rpi-400.dtb \
> bcm2711-rpi-4-b.dtb \
> + bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dtb \
> bcm2711-rpi-cm4-io.dtb \
> bcm2837-rpi-3-a-plus.dtb \
> bcm2837-rpi-3-b.dtb \
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..e9369aa0eb39
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +#include "arm/bcm2711-rpi-cm4-canopi.dts"
Powered by blists - more mailing lists