Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on
SC7280 SoCs.
Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <[email protected]>
---
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@
#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
#include <dt-bindings/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.h>
#include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/reset/qcom,sdm845-aoss.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/reset/qcom,sdm845-pdc.h>
#include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
/ {
@@ -50,6 +52,11 @@
no-map;
};
+ smem_mem: memory@80900000 {
+ reg = <0x0 0x80900000 0x0 0x200000>;
+ no-map;
+ };
+
cpucp_mem: memory@80b00000 {
no-map;
reg = <0x0 0x80b00000 0x0 0x100000>;
@@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
};
+ tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
+ compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
+ syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
+ #hwlock-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ smem {
+ compatible = "qcom,smem";
+ memory-region = <&smem_mem>;
+ hwlocks = <&tcsr_mutex 3>;
+ };
+
firmware {
scm {
compatible = "qcom,scm-sc7280", "qcom,scm";
};
};
+ smp2p-adsp {
+ compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
+ qcom,smem = <443>, <429>;
+ interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
+ IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+ mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
+
+ qcom,local-pid = <0>;
+ qcom,remote-pid = <2>;
+
+ adsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
+ #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ adsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
+ interrupt-controller;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
+ };
+
+ smp2p-cdsp {
+ compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
+ qcom,smem = <94>, <432>;
+ interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
+ IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+ mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
+
+ qcom,local-pid = <0>;
+ qcom,remote-pid = <5>;
+
+ cdsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
+ #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ cdsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
+ interrupt-controller;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
+ };
+
+ smp2p-mpss {
+ compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
+ qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
+ interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
+ IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+ mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
+
+ qcom,local-pid = <0>;
+ qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
+
+ modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
+ #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
+ interrupt-controller;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
+
+ ipa_smp2p_out: ipa-ap-to-modem {
+ qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
+ #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ ipa_smp2p_in: ipa-modem-to-ap {
+ qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
+ interrupt-controller;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
+ };
+
+ smp2p-wpss {
+ compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
+ qcom,smem = <617>, <616>;
+ interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_WPSS
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
+ IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+ mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_WPSS
+ IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
+
+ qcom,local-pid = <0>;
+ qcom,remote-pid = <13>;
+
+ wpss_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
+ #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ wpss_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
+ qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
+ interrupt-controller;
+ #interrupt-cells = <2>;
+ };
+ };
+
pmu {
compatible = "arm,armv8-pmuv3";
interrupts = <GIC_PPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
@@ -315,6 +441,11 @@
};
};
+ tcsr_mutex_regs: syscon@1f40000 {
+ compatible = "syscon";
+ reg = <0 0x01f40000 0 0x40000>;
+ };
+
pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 {
compatible = "qcom,sc7280-pdc", "qcom,pdc";
reg = <0 0x0b220000 0 0x30000>;
@@ -328,6 +459,18 @@
interrupt-controller;
};
+ pdc_reset: reset-controller@b5e0000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,sc7280-pdc-global";
+ reg = <0 0x0b5e0000 0 0x20000>;
+ #reset-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
+ aoss_reset: reset-controller@c2a0000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,sc7280-aoss-cc", "qcom,sdm845-aoss-cc";
+ reg = <0 0x0c2a0000 0 0x31000>;
+ #reset-cells = <1>;
+ };
+
spmi_bus: spmi@c440000 {
compatible = "qcom,spmi-pmic-arb";
reg = <0 0x0c440000 0 0x1100>,
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:51:51)
> Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on
Maybe add (WPSS) after the name so we know they're related.
> SC7280 SoCs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
> Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^
>
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> @@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
> reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
> };
>
> + tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
> + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
> + syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
> + #hwlock-cells = <1>;
> + };
Is this node in the right place? I think the node above it is 'memory'?
In which case 'hwlock' comes before 'memory' alphabetically.
> +
> + smem {
> + compatible = "qcom,smem";
> + memory-region = <&smem_mem>;
> + hwlocks = <&tcsr_mutex 3>;
> + };
> +
> firmware {
> scm {
> compatible = "qcom,scm-sc7280", "qcom,scm";
> };
> };
>
> + smp2p-adsp {
> + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> + qcom,smem = <443>, <429>;
> + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
> + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
> + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> +
> + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> + qcom,remote-pid = <2>;
> +
> + adsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> + };
> +
> + adsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> + smp2p-cdsp {
> + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> + qcom,smem = <94>, <432>;
> + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
> + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
> + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> +
> + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> + qcom,remote-pid = <5>;
> +
> + cdsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> + };
> +
> + cdsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> + smp2p-mpss {
> + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> + qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
> + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> +
> + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> + qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
> +
> + modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> + };
> +
> + modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
Do these names need to have 'master' and 'slave' in them? We're trying
to avoid these terms. See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst Section
4 naming.
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + };
> +
> + ipa_smp2p_out: ipa-ap-to-modem {
> + qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
> + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> + };
> +
> + ipa_smp2p_in: ipa-modem-to-ap {
> + qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + };
> + };
> +
On Sat 13 Mar 15:46 CST 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:51:51)
> > Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on
>
> Maybe add (WPSS) after the name so we know they're related.
>
> > SC7280 SoCs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
> > Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^
> >
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > @@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
> > reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
> > };
> >
> > + tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
> > + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
> > + syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
> > + #hwlock-cells = <1>;
> > + };
>
> Is this node in the right place? I think the node above it is 'memory'?
> In which case 'hwlock' comes before 'memory' alphabetically.
>
Thanks for spotting this, as it's no longer acceptable to have a
standalone "syscon" node I was asked to rewrite the binding for this a
few months ago. So the tcsr_mutex should now be represented with a reg
under /soc.
> > +
> > + smem {
> > + compatible = "qcom,smem";
> > + memory-region = <&smem_mem>;
> > + hwlocks = <&tcsr_mutex 3>;
> > + };
> > +
> > firmware {
> > scm {
> > compatible = "qcom,scm-sc7280", "qcom,scm";
> > };
> > };
> >
> > + smp2p-adsp {
> > + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> > + qcom,smem = <443>, <429>;
> > + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
> > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> > + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> > + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
> > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> > +
> > + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> > + qcom,remote-pid = <2>;
> > +
> > + adsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + adsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> > + interrupt-controller;
> > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
> > + smp2p-cdsp {
> > + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> > + qcom,smem = <94>, <432>;
> > + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
> > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> > + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> > + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
> > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> > +
> > + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> > + qcom,remote-pid = <5>;
> > +
> > + cdsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + cdsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> > + interrupt-controller;
> > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
> > + smp2p-mpss {
> > + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> > + qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
> > + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> > + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> > + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> > +
> > + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> > + qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
> > +
> > + modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
>
> Do these names need to have 'master' and 'slave' in them? We're trying
> to avoid these terms. See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst Section
> 4 naming.
>
They need to match the naming in the firmware, but I would welcome a
future change to something in line with the coding style and simply more
descriptive.
Regards,
Bjorn
> > + interrupt-controller;
> > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + ipa_smp2p_out: ipa-ap-to-modem {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
> > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + ipa_smp2p_in: ipa-modem-to-ap {
> > + qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
> > + interrupt-controller;
> > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-03-13 20:16:39)
> On Sat 13 Mar 15:46 CST 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>
> > Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:51:51)
> > > Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on
> >
> > Maybe add (WPSS) after the name so we know they're related.
> >
> > > SC7280 SoCs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
> > > Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^
> > >
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> > > @@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
> > > reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
> > > };
> > >
> > > + tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
> > > + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
> > > + syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
> > > + #hwlock-cells = <1>;
> > > + };
> >
> > Is this node in the right place? I think the node above it is 'memory'?
> > In which case 'hwlock' comes before 'memory' alphabetically.
> >
>
> Thanks for spotting this, as it's no longer acceptable to have a
> standalone "syscon" node I was asked to rewrite the binding for this a
> few months ago. So the tcsr_mutex should now be represented with a reg
> under /soc.
Oh nice, I wasn't aware.
> > > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> > > + };
> > > + };
> > > +
> > > + smp2p-mpss {
> > > + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> > > + qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
> > > + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> > > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> > > + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> > > + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> > > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> > > +
> > > + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> > > + qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
> > > +
> > > + modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> > > + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> > > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> > > + };
> > > +
> > > + modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> > > + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> >
> > Do these names need to have 'master' and 'slave' in them? We're trying
> > to avoid these terms. See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst Section
> > 4 naming.
> >
>
> They need to match the naming in the firmware, but I would welcome a
> future change to something in line with the coding style and simply more
> descriptive.
>
Sibi can this be done? I think it's still pretty early days for the
firmware so hopefully the terms can be replaced with something
different.
On 2021-03-24 03:36, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-03-13 20:16:39)
>> On Sat 13 Mar 15:46 CST 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>
>> > Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:51:51)
>> > > Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on
>> >
>> > Maybe add (WPSS) after the name so we know they're related.
>> >
>> > > SC7280 SoCs.
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <[email protected]>
>> > > ---
>> > >
>> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
>> > > Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^
>> > >
>> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> > > 1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> > > index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
>> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> > > @@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
>> > > reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
>> > > };
>> > >
>> > > + tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
>> > > + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
>> > > + syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
>> > > + #hwlock-cells = <1>;
>> > > + };
>> >
>> > Is this node in the right place? I think the node above it is 'memory'?
>> > In which case 'hwlock' comes before 'memory' alphabetically.
>> >
>>
>> Thanks for spotting this, as it's no longer acceptable to have a
>> standalone "syscon" node I was asked to rewrite the binding for this a
>> few months ago. So the tcsr_mutex should now be represented with a reg
>> under /soc.
>
> Oh nice, I wasn't aware.
>
>> > > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
>> > > + };
>> > > + };
>> > > +
>> > > + smp2p-mpss {
>> > > + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
>> > > + qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
>> > > + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
>> > > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
>> > > + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>> > > + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
>> > > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
>> > > +
>> > > + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
>> > > + qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
>> > > +
>> > > + modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
>> > > + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
>> > > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
>> > > + };
>> > > +
>> > > + modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
>> > > + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
>> >
>> > Do these names need to have 'master' and 'slave' in them? We're trying
>> > to avoid these terms. See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst Section
>> > 4 naming.
>> >
>>
>> They need to match the naming in the firmware, but I would welcome a
>> future change to something in line with the coding style and simply
>> more
>> descriptive.
>>
>
> Sibi can this be done? I think it's still pretty early days for the
> firmware so hopefully the terms can be replaced with something
> different.
I'll discuss the ask with the modem fw team and
get back.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
On 2021-03-24 12:19, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> On 2021-03-24 03:36, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-03-13 20:16:39)
>>> On Sat 13 Mar 15:46 CST 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>
>>> > Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:51:51)
>>> > > Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on
>>> >
>>> > Maybe add (WPSS) after the name so we know they're related.
>>> >
>>> > > SC7280 SoCs.
>>> > >
>>> > > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <[email protected]>
>>> > > ---
>>> > >
>>> > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
>>> > > Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^
>>> > >
>>> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> > > 1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
>>> > >
>>> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>>> > > index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
>>> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>>> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>>> > > @@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
>>> > > reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
>>> > > };
>>> > >
>>> > > + tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
>>> > > + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
>>> > > + syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
>>> > > + #hwlock-cells = <1>;
>>> > > + };
>>> >
>>> > Is this node in the right place? I think the node above it is 'memory'?
>>> > In which case 'hwlock' comes before 'memory' alphabetically.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Thanks for spotting this, as it's no longer acceptable to have a
>>> standalone "syscon" node I was asked to rewrite the binding for this
>>> a
>>> few months ago. So the tcsr_mutex should now be represented with a
>>> reg
>>> under /soc.
>>
>> Oh nice, I wasn't aware.
>>
>>> > > + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
>>> > > + };
>>> > > + };
>>> > > +
>>> > > + smp2p-mpss {
>>> > > + compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
>>> > > + qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
>>> > > + interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
>>> > > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
>>> > > + IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>>> > > + mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
>>> > > + IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
>>> > > +
>>> > > + qcom,local-pid = <0>;
>>> > > + qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
>>> > > +
>>> > > + modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
>>> > > + qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
>>> > > + #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
>>> > > + };
>>> > > +
>>> > > + modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
>>> > > + qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
>>> >
>>> > Do these names need to have 'master' and 'slave' in them? We're trying
>>> > to avoid these terms. See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst Section
>>> > 4 naming.
>>> >
>>>
>>> They need to match the naming in the firmware, but I would welcome a
>>> future change to something in line with the coding style and simply
>>> more
>>> descriptive.
>>>
>>
>> Sibi can this be done? I think it's still pretty early days for the
>> firmware so hopefully the terms can be replaced with something
>> different.
>
> I'll discuss the ask with the modem fw team and
> get back.
Sorry for the delayed response. Looks
like it's something Qualcomm wouldn't
want to do mid-project since a number
of the fw images are re-used across
platforms. But this is something that
will be taken up on newer SoCs.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.