From: "Kumar, Udit" <u-kumar1@ti.com>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
Beleswar Prasad Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com>
Cc: <vigneshr@ti.com>, <kristo@kernel.org>, <robh@kernel.org>,
<krzk+dt@kernel.org>, <conor+dt@kernel.org>, <hnagalla@ti.com>,
<jm@ti.com>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <u-kumar1@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] TI: K3: Switch MCU R5F cluster into Split mode
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 23:44:59 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0fe3f172-5a88-4f1d-9eb2-7b748f9f6743@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6f4b2271-7249-4285-9fee-1851135e1207@ti.com>
On 5/23/2025 6:46 PM, Andrew Davis wrote:
> On 5/23/25 6:48 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> On 14:27-20250523, Beleswar Prasad Padhi wrote:
>>> Hi Nishanth,
>>>
>>> On 5/22/2025 9:23 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>>>> On 13:04-20250522, Beleswar Padhi wrote:
>>>>> Several TI K3 SoCs like J7200, J721E, J721S2, J784S4 and J742S2
>>>>> have a
>>>>> R5F cluster in the MCU domain which is configured for LockStep
>>>>> mode at
>>>>> the moment. Switch this R5F cluster to Split mode by default in all
>>>>> corresponding board level DTs to maximize the number of R5F cores.
>>>> Why? I can read the patch to understand what you are trying to do, but
>>>> the rationale needs to be explained.
>>>
>>>
>>> [..]
>> I suggest the following:
>> * SoC dts files - use a common standard for remote proc - lockstep makes
>> sense as it is right now
>> * Modification to board specific dts files - call them out as board
>> files specific patches to flip over to split mode - while considering
>> the possibilities that users may NOT upgrade kernel and bootloader at
>> the same time and the existence of EFI based dtb handover from
>> bootloader to kernel - which means, kernel should be able to
>> handle the
>> same combinations correctly. Also handle the carveouts correctly for
>> the new processors - at least state the strategy - overlays etc..
>> Come
>> to think of it, I think we should fix up the carveout strategy for
>> user programmable remote cores first before attempting all this new
>> processor additions.
>
> +1
>
> The core issue here is that split vs lockstep is a *configuration*, which
> means it doesn't belong in DT in the first place. This is the reason
> to keep
> config out of DT, why should what mode my R5 core starts in be based
> on what
> board I'm using? It hard-codes what should be configurable decisions.
configurable decisions is bootloader build .
and you know what you are building then change DT as well.
>
> Same issue with carveouts, so IMHO all of the: carveouts, mailbox
> selection,
> timer reserved status, and mode selection belong in an overlay. It
> doesn't
> fix the issues, but at least it isolates it.
>
Its usage model, and split mode is enabled at board level.
as default, split mode is used, in case lock-step is needed then change
DT in custom build too.
Also, Patch 1/2 should be posted as different patch.
> Andrew
>
>> * Split out the fixes patches separately out - no reason to mix it up
>> with the rest of the refactoring.
>> * Fix your commit messages and subject lines to indicate clearly what is
>> impacted, rationale, backward compatibility status
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250522071828.285462-7-b-padhi@ti.com/#Z31dts:upstream:src:arm64:ti:k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi
>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250522073426.329344-2-b-padhi@ti.com/
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-27 18:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-22 7:34 [PATCH 0/2] TI: K3: Switch MCU R5F cluster into Split mode Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-22 7:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j742s2-mcu-wakeup: Override firmware-name for MCU R5F cores Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-22 7:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3: Switch MCU R5F cluster to Split-mode Beleswar Padhi
2025-05-22 15:53 ` [PATCH 0/2] TI: K3: Switch MCU R5F cluster into Split mode Nishanth Menon
2025-05-23 8:57 ` Beleswar Prasad Padhi
2025-05-23 11:48 ` Nishanth Menon
2025-05-23 13:16 ` Andrew Davis
2025-05-27 18:14 ` Kumar, Udit [this message]
2025-05-27 6:09 ` Beleswar Prasad Padhi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0fe3f172-5a88-4f1d-9eb2-7b748f9f6743@ti.com \
--to=u-kumar1@ti.com \
--cc=afd@ti.com \
--cc=b-padhi@ti.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hnagalla@ti.com \
--cc=jm@ti.com \
--cc=kristo@kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox