Possible misleading information in rockchip,rk3588-cru.yaml
Subsystems (2)
Hi,
rockchip,rk3588-cru.yaml, dt-binding for RK3588 clock and reset module, contains description of customized property "rockchip,grf",
rockchip,grf:
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
description: >
phandle to the syscon managing the "general register files". It is used for GRF muxes, if missing any muxes present in the GRF will not be available.
But after doing some searching, I found that clk-rk3588.c actually defines no clock hardware with MUXGRF type. This is also true in in the vendor code[1], it seems there is actually no GRF mux on RK3588 platform.
Best regards,
Yao Zi
Quoted 12 lines · Yao Zi
Hi,
rockchip,rk3588-cru.yaml, dt-binding for RK3588 clock and reset module, contains description of customized property "rockchip,grf",
rockchip,grf:
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
description: >
phandle to the syscon managing the "general register files". It is used for GRF muxes, if missing any muxes present in the GRF will not be available.
Quoted 4 lines
But after doing some searching, I found that
clk-rk3588.cactually defines no clock hardware with MUXGRF type. This is also true in in the vendor code[1], it seems there is actually no GRF mux on RK3588 platform.
Have you been able to check the datasheet/register map for this piece of hardware? Does it have a grf register region?
Wouldn't be surprised if it didn't, and the cause of it being in the binding was nothing more than copy-paste.
Quoted 18 lines · Conor Dooley
Quoted 12 lines · Yao Zi
Hi,
rockchip,rk3588-cru.yaml, dt-binding for RK3588 clock and reset module, contains description of customized property "rockchip,grf",
rockchip,grf:
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
description: >
phandle to the syscon managing the "general register files". It is used for GRF muxes, if missing any muxes present in the GRF will not be available.Quoted 4 lines
But after doing some searching, I found that
clk-rk3588.cactually defines no clock hardware with MUXGRF type. This is also true in in the vendor code[1], it seems there is actually no GRF mux on RK3588 platform.
Quoted 4 lines
Have you been able to check the datasheet/register map for this piece of hardware? Does it have a grf register region?
Wouldn't be surprised if it didn't, and the cause of it being in the binding was nothing more than copy-paste.
Have checked a public datasheet[1], RK3588 does have corresponding grf region and there are only clock related bits in PHP_GRF_CLK_CON1[2].
But these gmac clocks bits are used in dwmac-rk GMAC driver[3] internally, out of the common clock driver, rk3588-cru. So I don't think the CRU needs access to the grf by design.
Best regards,
Yao Zi
[1]: https://github.com/FanX-Tek/rk3588-TRM-and-Datasheet/blob/master/Rockchip%20RK3588%20TRM%20V1.0-Part1-20220309.pdf
[2]: Page 836 in [1]
[3]: net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-rk.c:1132
Quoted 24 lines · Yao Zi
Quoted 18 lines · Conor Dooley
Quoted 12 lines · Yao Zi
Hi,
rockchip,rk3588-cru.yaml, dt-binding for RK3588 clock and reset module, contains description of customized property "rockchip,grf",
rockchip,grf:
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
description: >
phandle to the syscon managing the "general register files". It is used for GRF muxes, if missing any muxes present in the GRF will not be available.Quoted 4 lines
But after doing some searching, I found that
clk-rk3588.cactually defines no clock hardware with MUXGRF type. This is also true in in the vendor code[1], it seems there is actually no GRF mux on RK3588 platform.Quoted 4 lines
Have you been able to check the datasheet/register map for this piece of hardware? Does it have a grf register region?
Wouldn't be surprised if it didn't, and the cause of it being in the binding was nothing more than copy-paste.
Quoted 6 lines
Have checked a public datasheet[1], RK3588 does have corresponding grf region and there are only clock related bits in PHP_GRF_CLK_CON1[2].
But these gmac clocks bits are used in dwmac-rk GMAC driver[3] internally, out of the common clock driver, rk3588-cru. So I don't think the CRU needs access to the grf by design.
That sounds like a reasonable justification for deleting it - but please check U-Boot etc to make sure that other projects are not using this in a different manner to the kernel. If they are not using it, then please send a patch :)