Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: timer: Add am6 compatible for ti-timer

Nishanth Menon
2022-04-08T07:35:48Z

On 07:38-20220408, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> [220407 13:31]:
> > On 10:10-20220407, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ti,timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ti,timer.txt
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ti,timer.txt
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ti,timer.txt
> > > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ Required properties:
> > > ti,omap5430-timer (applicable to OMAP543x devices)
> > > ti,am335x-timer (applicable to AM335x devices)
> > > ti,am335x-timer-1ms (applicable to AM335x devices)
> > > + ti,am6-timer (applicable to AM6 devices)
> >
> > Suggestion:
> >
> > Could we call this ti,am65-timer instead? AM6 is a bit nuanced and spans
> > a couple of sub SoC architectures.
>
> I think the timer hardware is the same across am64, am65 and j7. So we
> should pick something to represent the am6 timers as it would allow using
> shared dtsi files for the 16 - 30 timers there are.
>
> Using shared timer dtsi files should work as long as the clocks are
> defined in include/dt-bindings/clock for each SoC, and assuming we can use
> the same compatible property for the timers.

Compatible should work fine, Though I doubt clock and other indices
(base address etc will scale appropriately), but we could give it a
shot, but we can discuss that in the context of the dts patches.

>
> Of course if the timers are really different across am64, am65 and j72
> then multiple compatible properties are neeeded.
>
> If the timer hardware is the same, then I guess we should just pick the
> earliest version, so how about using ti,am64-timer?

yep - the oldest version will be ti,am654-timer ( AM65 was the first
K3 device. Unfortunately, the numbering does'nt follow a chronological
order)

--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3 1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D