2023-04-21 14:13:29

by Luca Weiss

Subject: [PATCH RFC 3/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6350: add uart1 node

Add the node describing uart1 incl. opp table and pinctrl.

Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 63 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi
index 18c4616848ce..16c5e9a6c98a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi
@@ -378,6 +378,25 @@ opp-2073600000 {
};
};

+ qup_opp_table: opp-table-qup {
+ compatible = "operating-points-v2";
+
+ opp-75000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <75000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>;
+ };
+
+ opp-100000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <100000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_svs>;
+ };
+
+ opp-128000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <128000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>;
+ };
+ };
+
pmu {
compatible = "arm,armv8-pmuv3";
interrupts = <GIC_PPI 5 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
@@ -741,6 +760,22 @@ i2c0: i2c@880000 {
status = "disabled";
};

+ uart1: serial@884000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,geni-uart";
+ reg = <0 0x00884000 0 0x4000>;
+ clock-names = "se";
+ clocks = <&gcc GCC_QUPV3_WRAP0_S1_CLK>;
+ pinctrl-names = "default";
+ pinctrl-0 = <&qup_uart1_cts>, <&qup_uart1_rts>, <&qup_uart1_tx>, <&qup_uart1_rx>;
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 602 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ power-domains = <&rpmhpd SM6350_CX>;
+ operating-points-v2 = <&qup_opp_table>;
+ interconnects = <&clk_virt MASTER_QUP_CORE_0 0 &clk_virt SLAVE_QUP_CORE_0 0>,
+ <&aggre1_noc MASTER_QUP_0 0 &clk_virt SLAVE_EBI_CH0 0>;
+ interconnect-names = "qup-core", "qup-config";
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
+
i2c2: i2c@888000 {
compatible = "qcom,geni-i2c";
reg = <0 0x00888000 0 0x4000>;
@@ -1726,6 +1761,34 @@ qup_i2c10_default: qup-i2c10-default-state {
drive-strength = <2>;
bias-pull-up;
};
+
+ qup_uart1_cts: qup-uart1-cts-default-state {
+ pins = "gpio61";
+ function = "qup01";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-disable;
+ };
+
+ qup_uart1_rts: qup-uart1-rts-default-state {
+ pins = "gpio62";
+ function = "qup01";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-pull-down;
+ };
+
+ qup_uart1_tx: qup-uart1-tx-default-state {
+ pins = "gpio63";
+ function = "qup01";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-pull-up;
+ };
+
+ qup_uart1_rx: qup-uart1-rx-default-state {
+ pins = "gpio64";
+ function = "qup01";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-disable;
+ };
};

apps_smmu: iommu@15000000 {

--
2.40.0

2023-04-23 10:58:24

by Krzysztof Kozlowski

Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6350: add uart1 node

On 21/04/2023 16:11, Luca Weiss wrote:
> Add the node describing uart1 incl. opp table and pinctrl.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+)

Please do not send DTS patches for net-next. DTS must go via Qualcomm
SoC. Split the series and mention where is the bindings change in DTS
patchset.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

2023-05-12 15:13:55

by Krzysztof Kozlowski

Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6350: add uart1 node

On 12/05/2023 16:30, Luca Weiss wrote:
> On Sun Apr 23, 2023 at 12:51 PM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/04/2023 16:11, Luca Weiss wrote:
>>> Add the node describing uart1 incl. opp table and pinctrl.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+)
>>
>> Please do not send DTS patches for net-next. DTS must go via Qualcomm
>> SoC. Split the series and mention where is the bindings change in DTS
>> patchset.
>
> Sorry, just saw now after already sending v2.
>
> Is this a special rule for linux-bluetooth@ / netdev@? Isn't it easier
> to keep it together so the status of series can be assessed easier? I've
> always submitted patches by topic, like input patches + dts patches and
> it was never mentioned.

The rule that DTS must go via Qualcomm SoC (arm-soc) was there always,
but other maintainers often do not pay attention to this. I don't blame
them, don't get me wrong. I am just stating the observed actions.
Usually netdev folks and Greg will take everything you throw at them, so
for these subsystems it is recommended to split DTS to different patchset.

For other maintainers it is usually also more useful to split, because
then they can apply entire patchset with one command, instead of picking
up specific patches (omitting DTS).

Best regards,
Krzysztof