Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@xilinx.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
CC:     "ohad@wizery.com" <ohad@wizery.com>,
        "bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Michal Simek <michals@xilinx.com>,
        Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@xilinx.com>, Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@xilinx.com>,
        "mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        "linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for
 ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v4 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for
 ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings
Thread-Index: AQHWGl7uxdGBAyULe0azD2FJNJZOnqijj0uAgBdEEWA=
Date:   Tue, 26 May 2020 17:40:22 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR02MB44077C8B7B7FD23FDE8E31B8B5B00@BYAPR02MB4407.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1587749770-15082-1-git-send-email-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com>
 <1587749770-15082-5-git-send-email-ben.levinsky@xilinx.com>
 <20200511221755.GA13585@bogus>
In-Reply-To: <20200511221755.GA13585@bogus>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 3aa5111d-c412-464e-ea9c-08d8019bdda8
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 May 2020 17:40:22.1939
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 657af505-d5df-48d0-8300-c31994686c5c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 3KaaheJxNzn1ZwL3tj7LkV/r1Mm73Tj5AvCfCAq8wzEKUAstNfHuvdutenTRxcgRL71HOEC14g0C7P07+XI0Vw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR02MB6437
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Rob,

The Xilinx R5 Remoteproc driver has been around for a long time -- admitted=
ly we should have upstreamed it long ago. The driver in the current form is=
 using an "classic" remoteproc device tree node as described here.

I am working with Stefano to come up with an appropriate System Device Tree=
 representation but it is not going to be ready right away. Our preference =
would be to upstream the remoteproc node and driver in their current forms =
while system device tree is maturing.

Will also update as per your below comments in a v5 too.

Best Regards,
Ben Levinsky

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>=20
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 3:18 PM
To: Ben Levinsky <BLEVINSK@xilinx.com>
Cc: ohad@wizery.com; bjorn.andersson@linaro.org; Michal Simek <michals@xili=
nx.com>; Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@xilinx.com>; Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@xilinx.com>; ma=
rk.rutland@arm.com; linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@list=
s.infradead.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; =
Jason Wu <j.wu@xilinx.com>; Jiaying Liang <jliang@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: Add documentation for =
ZynqMP R5 rproc bindings

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 10:36:09AM -0700, Ben Levinsky wrote:
> Add binding for ZynqMP R5 OpenAMP.
>=20
> Represent the RPU domain resources in one device node. Each RPU=20
> processor is a subnode of the top RPU domain node.

This needs to be sorted out as part of the system DT effort that Xilinx is =
working on. I can't see this binding co-existing with it.

>=20
> Signed-off-by: Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@xilinx.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wu <j.wu@xilinx.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wendy Liang <jliang@xilinx.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
> ---
> Changes since v2:
> - update zynqmp_r5 yaml parsing to not raise warnings for extra
>   information in children of R5 node. The warning "node has a unit
>   name, but no reg or ranges property" will still be raised though=20
>   as this particular node is needed to describe the
>   '#address-cells' and '#size-cells' information.
> Changes since 3:
> - remove warning '/example-0/rpu@ff9a0000/r5@0:
>   node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property'
>   by adding reg to r5 node.
> ---
>=20
>  .../remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc.yaml    | 127 +++++++++++++++=
++++++
>  1 file changed, 127 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644=20
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remotepr
> oc.yaml
>=20
> diff --git=20
> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remote
> proc.yaml=20
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remote
> proc.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..41520b6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-re
> +++ moteproc.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) %YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/remoteproc/xilinx,zynqmp-r5-remotepr=
oc.yaml#"
> +$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#"
> +
> +title: Xilinx R5 remote processor controller bindings
> +
> +description:
> +  This document defines the binding for the remoteproc component that=20
> +loads and
> +  boots firmwares on the Xilinx Zynqmp and Versal family chipset.
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Ed Mooring <ed.mooring@xilinx.com>
> +  - Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@xilinx.com>
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0"
> +
> +  core_conf:
> +    description:
> +      R5 core configuration (valid string - split or lock-step)
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  interrupts:
> +    description:
> +      Interrupt mapping for remoteproc IPI. It is required if the
> +      user uses the remoteproc driver with the RPMsg kernel driver.
> +    maxItems: 6
> +
> +  memory-region:
> +    maxItems: 4
> +    minItems: 4
> +  pnode-id:
> +    maxItems: 1

What is this?=20
[Ben Levinsky] I will description for this. This is used by the Xilinx powe=
r management code later on when configuring the RPU.

> +  mboxes:
> +    maxItems: 2
> +  mbox-names:
> +    maxItems: 2
> +
> +  r5@0:
> +    type: object
> +    required:
> +        - '#address-cells'
> +        - '#size-cells'
> +        - pnode-id
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +     reserved-memory {
> +          #address-cells =3D <1>;
> +          #size-cells =3D <1>;
> +          ranges;
> +          rpu0vdev0vring0: rpu0vdev0vring0@3ed40000 {
> +               no-map;
> +               reg =3D <0x3ed40000 0x4000>;
> +          };
> +          rpu0vdev0vring1: rpu0vdev0vring1@3ed44000 {
> +               no-map;
> +               reg =3D <0x3ed44000 0x4000>;
> +          };
> +          rpu0vdev0buffer: rpu0vdev0buffer@3ed48000 {
> +               no-map;
> +               reg =3D <0x3ed48000 0x100000>;
> +          };
> +          rproc_0_reserved: rproc@3ed000000 {
> +               no-map;
> +               reg =3D <0x3ed00000 0x40000>;
> +          };
> +     };
> +     rpu: rpu@ff9a0000 {
> +          compatible =3D "xlnx,zynqmp-r5-remoteproc-1.0";
> +          #address-cells =3D <1>;
> +          #size-cells =3D <1>;
> +          ranges;
> +          core_conf =3D "split";

If split, then where is the 2nd core?
[Ben Levinsky] Will fix, I will add second core in v5.

> +          reg =3D <0xFF9A0000 0x10000>;
> +          r5_0: r5@0 {

Unit-addresses are based on 'reg' values.
[Ben Levinsky] Will fix this, thanks

> +               ranges;
> +               #address-cells =3D <1>;
> +               #size-cells =3D <1>;
> +               reg =3D <0xFF9A0100 0x1000>;
> +               memory-region =3D <&rproc_0_reserved>, <&rpu0vdev0buffer>=
, <&rpu0vdev0vring0>, <&rpu0vdev0vring1>;
> +               pnode-id =3D <0x7>;
> +               mboxes =3D <&ipi_mailbox_rpu0 0>, <&ipi_mailbox_rpu0 1>;
> +               mbox-names =3D "tx", "rx";
> +               tcm_0_a: tcm_0@0 {
> +                    #address-cells =3D <1>;
> +                    #size-cells =3D <1>;
> +                    reg =3D <0xFFE00000 0x10000>;
> +                    pnode-id =3D <0xf>;

These nodes probably need some sort of compatible. And don't the TCMs have =
different addresses for R5 vs. the A cores?
[Ben Levinsky] I can add a compatible. The addressesing here is absolute (i=
.e. 0xffex-xxxx ) as it is used from point of view of A core here.

> +               };
> +               tcm_0_b: tcm_0@1 {
> +                    #address-cells =3D <2>;
> +                    #size-cells =3D <2>;
> +                    reg =3D <0xFFE20000 0x10000>;
> +                    pnode-id =3D <0x10>;
> +               };
> +          };
> +     };
> +
> +
> +     zynqmp_ipi1 {
> +          compatible =3D "xlnx,zynqmp-ipi-mailbox";
> +          interrupt-parent =3D <&gic>;
> +          interrupts =3D <0 29 4>;
> +          xlnx,ipi-id =3D <7>;
> +          #address-cells =3D <1>;
> +          #size-cells =3D <1>;
> +          ranges;
> +
> +          /* APU<->RPU0 IPI mailbox controller */
> +          ipi_mailbox_rpu0: mailbox@ff90000 {
> +               reg =3D <0xff990600 0x20>,
> +                     <0xff990620 0x20>,
> +                     <0xff9900c0 0x20>,
> +                     <0xff9900e0 0x20>;
> +               reg-names =3D "local_request_region",
> +                        "local_response_region",
> +                        "remote_request_region",
> +                        "remote_response_region";
> +               #mbox-cells =3D <1>;
> +               xlnx,ipi-id =3D <1>;
> +          };
> +     };
> +
> +...
> --
> 2.7.4
>=20