| Message ID | 20240508-b4-upstream-j721s2-of-upstream-v1-4-ed0933172410@ti.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Tom Rini |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Enable OF_UPSTREAM for j721s2 and am68 | expand |
Hi Manorit, On 08/05/24 12:56, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > Update the file with the required nodes from J721s2 R5 file to start > using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68. > > Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@ti.com> > --- What's the motivation behind this patch vs. squashing it into patch 5/6? > arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > index 695aadc287bd..038b08dc3e01 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ > compatible = "ti,am654-rproc"; > reg = <0x0 0x00a90000 0x0 0x10>; > power-domains = <&k3_pds 61 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > - <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > + <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > + <&k3_pds 4 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > resets = <&k3_reset 202 0>; > clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>; > assigned-clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>, <&k3_clks 202 0>; > @@ -54,10 +55,12 @@ > > &secure_proxy_mcu { > bootph-pre-ram; > + status = "okay"; > }; > > &secure_proxy_sa3 { > bootph-pre-ram; > + status = "okay"; > }; > > &cbass_mcu_wakeup { >
Hi Neha, On 16:09-20240508, Neha Malcom Francis wrote: > Hi Manorit, > > On 08/05/24 12:56, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > Update the file with the required nodes from J721s2 R5 file to start > > using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68. > > > > Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@ti.com> > > --- > > What's the motivation behind this patch vs. squashing it into patch 5/6? > Could've squashed it ig, I think developed it in this order so this remained. Would squash it. Also realised that I should be putting that patch before the config split otherwise am68 boot would break again. Would take that up as well in v2. Thanks for the review! Regards, Manorit > > arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts | 5 ++++- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > index 695aadc287bd..038b08dc3e01 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ > > compatible = "ti,am654-rproc"; > > reg = <0x0 0x00a90000 0x0 0x10>; > > power-domains = <&k3_pds 61 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > > - <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > > + <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > > + <&k3_pds 4 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > > resets = <&k3_reset 202 0>; > > clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>; > > assigned-clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>, <&k3_clks 202 0>; > > @@ -54,10 +55,12 @@ > > &secure_proxy_mcu { > > bootph-pre-ram; > > + status = "okay"; > > }; > > &secure_proxy_sa3 { > > bootph-pre-ram; > > + status = "okay"; > > }; > > &cbass_mcu_wakeup { > > > > -- > Thanking You > Neha Malcom Francis
Hi Neha, On 10:37-20240509, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > Hi Neha, > > On 16:09-20240508, Neha Malcom Francis wrote: > > Hi Manorit, > > > > On 08/05/24 12:56, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > > Update the file with the required nodes from J721s2 R5 file to start > > > using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@ti.com> > > > --- > > > > What's the motivation behind this patch vs. squashing it into patch 5/6? > > > > Could've squashed it ig, I think developed it in this order so this > remained. Would squash it. Also realised that I should be putting that > patch before the config split otherwise am68 boot would break again. > Would take that up as well in v2. Thanks for the review! > Though on second thoughts.. I think it's good as it tells that AM68 R5 DT had been missing some changes. If someone wants to track what changed then ig it's better that they don't have to debug the merge commit which ends up altering the contents of AM68 R5 DT ( in-case this patch ain't there ) and people will have to manually check the diff as to what altered. Do you think it's better to keep this patch with the following reasoning? Regards, Manorit > Regards, > Manorit > > > > arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts | 5 ++++- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > > index 695aadc287bd..038b08dc3e01 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > > @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ > > > compatible = "ti,am654-rproc"; > > > reg = <0x0 0x00a90000 0x0 0x10>; > > > power-domains = <&k3_pds 61 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > > > - <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > > > + <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > > > + <&k3_pds 4 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > > > resets = <&k3_reset 202 0>; > > > clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>; > > > assigned-clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>, <&k3_clks 202 0>; > > > @@ -54,10 +55,12 @@ > > > &secure_proxy_mcu { > > > bootph-pre-ram; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > }; > > > &secure_proxy_sa3 { > > > bootph-pre-ram; > > > + status = "okay"; > > > }; > > > &cbass_mcu_wakeup { > > > > > > > -- > > Thanking You > > Neha Malcom Francis
Hi Manorit On 09/05/24 11:04, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > Hi Neha, > > On 10:37-20240509, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: >> Hi Neha, >> >> On 16:09-20240508, Neha Malcom Francis wrote: >>> Hi Manorit, >>> >>> On 08/05/24 12:56, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: >>>> Update the file with the required nodes from J721s2 R5 file to start >>>> using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@ti.com> >>>> --- >>> >>> What's the motivation behind this patch vs. squashing it into patch 5/6? >>> >> >> Could've squashed it ig, I think developed it in this order so this >> remained. Would squash it. Also realised that I should be putting that >> patch before the config split otherwise am68 boot would break again. >> Would take that up as well in v2. Thanks for the review! >> > > Though on second thoughts.. I think it's good as it tells that AM68 R5 > DT had been missing some changes. If someone wants to track what changed > then ig it's better that they don't have to debug the merge commit which > ends up altering the contents of AM68 R5 DT ( in-case this patch ain't > there ) and people will have to manually check the diff as to what > altered. Do you think it's better to keep this patch with the following > reasoning? > Yes you can do that but I think this commit message is confusing. The "start using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68" threw me off, maybe modify it to say that AM68 R5 DT is missing these changes and needs them why? After that grabbing the common bits into an SoC R5 file in patch 5/6 makes sense. > Regards, > Manorit > >> Regards, >> Manorit >> >>>> arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts | 5 ++++- >>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts >>>> index 695aadc287bd..038b08dc3e01 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts >>>> @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ >>>> compatible = "ti,am654-rproc"; >>>> reg = <0x0 0x00a90000 0x0 0x10>; >>>> power-domains = <&k3_pds 61 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, >>>> - <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; >>>> + <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, >>>> + <&k3_pds 4 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; >>>> resets = <&k3_reset 202 0>; >>>> clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>; >>>> assigned-clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>, <&k3_clks 202 0>; >>>> @@ -54,10 +55,12 @@ >>>> &secure_proxy_mcu { >>>> bootph-pre-ram; >>>> + status = "okay"; >>>> }; >>>> &secure_proxy_sa3 { >>>> bootph-pre-ram; >>>> + status = "okay"; >>>> }; >>>> &cbass_mcu_wakeup { >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thanking You >>> Neha Malcom Francis
Hi Neha, On 11:29-20240509, Neha Malcom Francis wrote: > Hi Manorit > > On 09/05/24 11:04, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > Hi Neha, > > > > On 10:37-20240509, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > > Hi Neha, > > > > > > On 16:09-20240508, Neha Malcom Francis wrote: > > > > Hi Manorit, > > > > > > > > On 08/05/24 12:56, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > > > > Update the file with the required nodes from J721s2 R5 file to start > > > > > using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@ti.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > What's the motivation behind this patch vs. squashing it into patch 5/6? > > > > > > > > > > Could've squashed it ig, I think developed it in this order so this > > > remained. Would squash it. Also realised that I should be putting that > > > patch before the config split otherwise am68 boot would break again. > > > Would take that up as well in v2. Thanks for the review! > > > > > > > Though on second thoughts.. I think it's good as it tells that AM68 R5 > > DT had been missing some changes. If someone wants to track what changed > > then ig it's better that they don't have to debug the merge commit which > > ends up altering the contents of AM68 R5 DT ( in-case this patch ain't > > there ) and people will have to manually check the diff as to what > > altered. Do you think it's better to keep this patch with the following > > reasoning? > > > > Yes you can do that but I think this commit message is confusing. The "start > using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68" threw me off, maybe modify it to say that > AM68 R5 DT is missing these changes and needs them why? After that grabbing > the common bits into an SoC R5 file in patch 5/6 makes sense. > Ah okay, I think I can explain better "start using k3-am68-sk-r5 file" in the commit message itself along with telling the reasoning as to why it wasn't failing previously as well along with your suggestions. Thanks! Regards, Manorit > > > Regards, > > Manorit > > > > > Regards, > > > Manorit > > > > > > > > arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts | 5 ++++- > > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > > > > index 695aadc287bd..038b08dc3e01 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts > > > > > @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ > > > > > compatible = "ti,am654-rproc"; > > > > > reg = <0x0 0x00a90000 0x0 0x10>; > > > > > power-domains = <&k3_pds 61 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > > > > > - <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > > > > > + <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, > > > > > + <&k3_pds 4 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; > > > > > resets = <&k3_reset 202 0>; > > > > > clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>; > > > > > assigned-clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>, <&k3_clks 202 0>; > > > > > @@ -54,10 +55,12 @@ > > > > > &secure_proxy_mcu { > > > > > bootph-pre-ram; > > > > > + status = "okay"; > > > > > }; > > > > > &secure_proxy_sa3 { > > > > > bootph-pre-ram; > > > > > + status = "okay"; > > > > > }; > > > > > &cbass_mcu_wakeup { > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanking You > > > > Neha Malcom Francis > > -- > Thanking You > Neha Malcom Francis
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts index 695aadc287bd..038b08dc3e01 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts @@ -24,7 +24,8 @@ compatible = "ti,am654-rproc"; reg = <0x0 0x00a90000 0x0 0x10>; power-domains = <&k3_pds 61 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, - <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; + <&k3_pds 202 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>, + <&k3_pds 4 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>; resets = <&k3_reset 202 0>; clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>; assigned-clocks = <&k3_clks 61 1>, <&k3_clks 202 0>; @@ -54,10 +55,12 @@ &secure_proxy_mcu { bootph-pre-ram; + status = "okay"; }; &secure_proxy_sa3 { bootph-pre-ram; + status = "okay"; }; &cbass_mcu_wakeup {
Update the file with the required nodes from J721s2 R5 file to start using k3-am68-sk-r5 file for AM68. Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@ti.com> --- arch/arm/dts/k3-am68-sk-r5-base-board.dts | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)