Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <8133a637-2295-6b1d-569a-381de692e330@ti.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 May 2023 13:04:00 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am62-main: add sa3_secproxy in
 cbass_main
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Nitin Yadav <n-yadav@ti.com>, <nm@ti.com>, <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        <kristo@kernel.org>, <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, <conor+dt@kernel.org>
CC:     <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230519113434.1024206-1-n-yadav@ti.com>
 <20230519113434.1024206-3-n-yadav@ti.com>
From:   Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230519113434.1024206-3-n-yadav@ti.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/19/23 6:34 AM, Nitin Yadav wrote:
> Add sa3_secproxy node in k3-am62-main.dtsi to keep device tree
> nodes in sync with u-boot nodes.

That is not a good reason, nodes should be added because the device
exists and should be described. Simply say that here.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Nitin Yadav <n-yadav@ti.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62-main.dtsi | 9 +++++++++
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62-main.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62-main.dtsi
> index b3e4857bbbe4..7c2af5b0e022 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62-main.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62-main.dtsi
> @@ -42,6 +42,15 @@ gic_its: msi-controller@1820000 {
>   		};
>   	};
>   
> +	sa3_secproxy: secproxy@44880000 {
> +		compatible = "ti,am654-secure-proxy";

The "ti,am654-secure-proxy" binding has interrupts as a required
property, so this will cause new binding check warnings.

We also already have a Secure Proxy instance in this DT, why
do we need this other one? Is this the instance that was added
for for the R5 use? I guess that would explain why there are no
interrupts to the big ARM core.. Can we actually use this
node in Linux then? If not mark it disabled/reserved.

Andrew

> +		#mbox-cells = <1>;
> +		reg-names = "rt", "scfg", "target_data";
> +		reg = <0x00 0x44880000 0x00 0x20000>,
> +		      <0x0 0x44860000 0x0 0x20000>,
> +		      <0x0 0x43600000 0x0 0x10000>;
> +	};
> +
>   	main_conf: syscon@100000 {
>   		compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd";
>   		reg = <0x00 0x00100000 0x00 0x20000>;