Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] soc: soc_ti_k3: Add support for AM62P variants

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1629 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 11:14:18AM -0500, Judith Mendez wrote:
> This adds a support for detecting AM62P SR1.0, SR1.1, SR1.2.
> 
> On AM62P, silicon revision is discovered with GP_SW1 register instead
> of JTAGID register, so introduce GP_SW register range to determine SoC
> revision for AM62P.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soc/soc_ti_k3.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
[snip]
> @@ -130,17 +184,23 @@ static const struct soc_ops soc_ti_k3_ops = {
>  int soc_ti_k3_probe(struct udevice *dev)
>  {
>  	struct soc_ti_k3_plat *plat = dev_get_plat(dev);
> -	u32 idreg;
> +	u32 gp_sw1_val = 0;
>  	void *idreg_addr;
> +	u32 idreg;
>  
> -	idreg_addr = dev_read_addr_ptr(dev);
> +	idreg_addr = dev_read_addr_index_ptr(dev, 0);
>  	if (!idreg_addr)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	idreg = readl(idreg_addr);
>  
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SOC_K3_AM62P5)
> +	if (soc_ti_k3_variant_in_gp_sw(idreg))
> +		gp_sw1_val = soc_ti_k3_get_variant_alternate(dev, idreg);
> +#endif /* CONFIG_SOC_K3_AM62P5 */

This isn't quite what I meant, as it will generate warnings about unused
variables for the tables, on other platforms, yes? What I was thinking
was:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SOC_K3_AM62P5) && soc_ti_k3_variant_in_gp_sw(idreg))
	gp_sw1_val = soc_ti_k3_get_variant_alternate(dev, idreg);
which shouldn't. And then can we check the other platforms similarly to
save space or no? Or am I unclear with what I'm thinking (or it's not
possible, I didn't dig at the rest of the code much)? Thanks.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]