Skip to contentSkip to conversation

ARM: dts: add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs

PATCH Applied Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 6 participants 11 messages Sep 24, 2014 – Oct 16, 2014

Subsystems (2)
Device tree bindings Arm Samsung Exynos
lore
Share & tools
lore

Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH v3 1/1 ARM: dts: add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs

Recent patch by Tomasz Figa ("irqchip: gic: Fix core ID calculation when topology is read from DT") fixed GIC driver to filter cluster ID from values returned by cpu_logical_map() for SoCs having registers mapped without per-CPU banking making it is possible to add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs. In case of Exynos SoCs these CPU nodes are also required by future changes adding initialization of cpuidle states in Exynos cpuidle driver through DT.

Tested on Origen board (Exynos4210 SoC) and Trats2 (Exynos4412 SoC).

Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>

---
Based on for-next branch of linux-samsung.git tree.

v3:
- refreshed on top of Kukjin's tree

v2:
- match the unit-address with the reg

 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4212.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+)
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi +17 -0
Index: b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi
===================================================================
@@ -31,6 +31,23 @@
 		pinctrl2 = &pinctrl_2;
 	};
 
+	cpus {
+		#address-cells = <1>;
+		#size-cells = <0>;
+
+		cpu at 900 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0x900>;
+		};
+
+		cpu at 901 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0x901>;
+		};
+	};
+
 	pmu_system_controller: system-controller at 10020000 {
 		clock-names = "clkout0", "clkout1", "clkout2", "clkout3",
 				"clkout4", "clkout8", "clkout9";
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4212.dtsi +17 -0
Index: b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4212.dtsi
===================================================================
@@ -22,6 +22,23 @@
 / {
 	compatible = "samsung,exynos4212", "samsung,exynos4";
 
+	cpus {
+		#address-cells = <1>;
+		#size-cells = <0>;
+
+		cpu at A00 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0xA00>;
+		};
+
+		cpu at A01 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0xA01>;
+		};
+	};
+
 	combiner: interrupt-controller at 10440000 {
 		samsung,combiner-nr = <18>;
 	};
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi +29 -0
Index: b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi
===================================================================
@@ -22,6 +22,35 @@
 / {
 	compatible = "samsung,exynos4412", "samsung,exynos4";
 
+	cpus {
+		#address-cells = <1>;
+		#size-cells = <0>;
+
+		cpu at A00 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0xA00>;
+		};
+
+		cpu at A01 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0xA01>;
+		};
+
+		cpu at A02 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0xA02>;
+		};
+
+		cpu at A03 {
+			device_type = "cpu";
+			compatible = "arm,cortex-a9";
+			reg = <0xA03>;
+		};
+	};
+
 	combiner: interrupt-controller at 10440000 {
 		samsung,combiner-nr = <20>;
 	};
Applied
#1 lore raw
Quoted 18 lines · Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz

Recent patch by Tomasz Figa ("irqchip: gic: Fix core ID calculation when topology is read from DT") fixed GIC driver to filter cluster ID from values returned by cpu_logical_map() for SoCs having registers mapped without per-CPU banking making it is possible to add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs. In case of Exynos SoCs these CPU nodes are also required by future changes adding initialization of cpuidle states in Exynos cpuidle driver through DT.

Tested on Origen board (Exynos4210 SoC) and Trats2 (Exynos4412 SoC).

Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>

---
Based on for-next branch of linux-samsung.git tree.

v3:
- refreshed on top of Kukjin's tree

Quoted 7 lines

v2:
- match the unit-address with the reg

 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4212.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+)

Thanks for re-spin and looks good to me.

Applied.

Thanks,
Kukjin

#2 lore raw

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Quoted 22 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 21 lines · Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz

Recent patch by Tomasz Figa ("irqchip: gic: Fix core ID calculation when topology is read from DT") fixed GIC driver to filter cluster ID from values returned by cpu_logical_map() for SoCs having registers mapped without per-CPU banking making it is possible to add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs. In case of Exynos SoCs these CPU nodes are also required by future changes adding initialization of cpuidle states in Exynos cpuidle driver through DT.

Tested on Origen board (Exynos4210 SoC) and Trats2 (Exynos4412 SoC).

Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>

---
Based on for-next branch of linux-samsung.git tree.

v3:
- refreshed on top of Kukjin's tree

v2:
- match the unit-address with the reg

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4212.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+)

Thanks for re-spin and looks good to me.

Applied.

That's great, now my Exynos CPUidle DT patch should be rebased on top of this patch so that thanks to the testing carried out by Bart it can be merged too.

Lorenzo

#3 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks and just note the branch which is including this change actually v4 is just rebased not v3 will be sent out to arm-soc last tonight or tomorrow.

- Kukjin

Quoted 42 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 22 lines
Quoted 21 lines · Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz

Recent patch by Tomasz Figa ("irqchip: gic: Fix core ID calculation when topology is read from DT") fixed GIC driver to filter cluster ID from values returned by cpu_logical_map() for SoCs having registers mapped without per-CPU banking making it is possible to add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs. In case of Exynos SoCs these CPU nodes are also required by future changes adding initialization of cpuidle states in Exynos cpuidle driver through DT.

Tested on Origen board (Exynos4210 SoC) and Trats2 (Exynos4412 SoC).

Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz<[email protected]>

---
Based on for-next branch of linux-samsung.git tree.

v3:
- refreshed on top of Kukjin's tree

v2:
- match the unit-address with the reg

Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4212.dtsi |   17 +++++++++++++++++
  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  3 files changed, 63 insertions(+)

Thanks for re-spin and looks good to me.

Applied.

That's great, now my Exynos CPUidle DT patch should be rebased on top of this patch so that thanks to the testing carried out by Bart it can be merged too.

Lorenzo

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Signature · 7 lines
Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <[email protected]>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
#4 lore raw

Hi Kukjin,

Quoted 6 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 2 lines · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks and just note the branch which is including this change actually v4 is just rebased not v3 will be sent out to arm-soc last tonight or tomorrow.

Could you keep this patch in a separate stable branch, so I could pull it as a dependency for Thomas Abraham's cpufreq series?

Best regards,
Tomasz

#5 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · Tomasz Figa

Hi Kukjin,

Quoted 6 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 2 lines · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks and just note the branch which is including this change actually v4 is just rebased not v3 will be sent out to arm-soc last tonight or tomorrow.

v3 is correct :) sorry, I confused the version...

Quoted 4 lines

Could you keep this patch in a separate stable branch, so I could pull it as a dependency for Thomas Abraham's cpufreq series?

It's possible, but would be better that DT changes are sent to upstream through samsung/arm-soc tree?...we suffered ugly conflicts between arm-soc and driver before and then we decided DT changes should be handled in arm-soc...Hmm...

- Kukjin

#6 lore raw
Quoted 14 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 9 lines · Tomasz Figa

Hi Kukjin,

Quoted 6 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 2 lines · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks and just note the branch which is including this change actually v4 is just rebased not v3 will be sent out to arm-soc last tonight or tomorrow.

v3 is correct :) sorry, I confused the version...

Quoted 1 line
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines

Could you keep this patch in a separate stable branch, so I could pull it as a dependency for Thomas Abraham's cpufreq series?

It's possible, but would be better that DT changes are sent to upstream through samsung/arm-soc tree?...we suffered ugly conflicts between arm-soc and driver before and then we decided DT changes should be handled in arm-soc...Hmm...

The only other option I can see is splitting the series and sending mach/dts patches through arm-soc and clock/cpufreq patches through clock tree. This would break cpufreq support in both trees, until they both hit Linus's tree. If this is not a problem, then I can proceed this way.

Please correct me if I'm missing something.

Best regards,
Tomasz

#7 lore raw
In reply to Kukjin Kim
Quoted 6 lines · Kukjin Kim
Quoted 2 lines · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks and just note the branch which is including this change actually v4 is just rebased not v3 will be sent out to arm-soc last tonight or tomorrow.

What's the plan for patch ? I do not see it upstream and would like to rebase the Exynos CPUidle changes on top of it.

Thanks,
Lorenzo

#8 lore raw
In reply to Lorenzo Pieralisi
Quoted 1 line · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks for the head up. I was about to send the PR to Rafael.

[ ... ]

Quoted 3 lines

That's great, now my Exynos CPUidle DT patch should be rebased on top of this patch so that thanks to the testing carried out by Bart it can be merged too.

Ok, I am getting confused. How can I rebase the latest patch of your series with a patch no yet available in my tree ?

I propose just to drop the last patch and wait for the next merge to reintegrate it into the cpuidle tree. Does it make sense ?

Thanks
-- Daniel

Signature · 5 lines
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
#9 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines · Daniel Lezcano
Quoted 1 line · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks for the head up. I was about to send the PR to Rafael.

Quoted 8 lines

[ ... ]

Quoted 3 lines

That's great, now my Exynos CPUidle DT patch should be rebased on top of this patch so that thanks to the testing carried out by Bart it can be merged too.

Ok, I am getting confused. How can I rebase the latest patch of your series with a patch no yet available in my tree ?

I just wanted to say that the Exynos CPUidle DT patch depends on this patch, that is now going through Samsung tree, to make sure we are on the same page and prevent issues, it was not clear, sorry.

Quoted 2 lines

I propose just to drop the last patch and wait for the next merge to reintegrate it into the cpuidle tree. Does it make sense ?

I agree, drop the Exynos CPUidle DT patch, we will reintegrate it in the CPUidle tree when the merge window closes and dependencies are sorted out.

Thanks a lot,
Lorenzo

#10 lore raw
Quoted 12 lines · Lorenzo Pieralisi
Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Lezcano
Quoted 1 line · Lorenzo Pieralisi

[CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]

Thanks for the head up. I was about to send the PR to Rafael.

[ ... ]

Quoted 3 lines

That's great, now my Exynos CPUidle DT patch should be rebased on top of this patch so that thanks to the testing carried out by Bart it can be merged too.

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Ok, I am getting confused. How can I rebase the latest patch of your series with a patch no yet available in my tree ?

I just wanted to say that the Exynos CPUidle DT patch depends on this patch, that is now going through Samsung tree, to make sure we are on the same page and prevent issues, it was not clear, sorry.

Ah, ok.

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines

I propose just to drop the last patch and wait for the next merge to reintegrate it into the cpuidle tree. Does it make sense ?

I agree, drop the Exynos CPUidle DT patch, we will reintegrate it in the CPUidle tree when the merge window closes and dependencies are sorted out.

Perfect. I sent the PR to Rafael.

Thanks

-- Daniel

Signature · 5 lines
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog