From: Beleswar Prasad Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com>
To: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
Tero Kristo <kristo@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>,
Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@ti.com>,
Eric Chanudet <echanude@redhat.com>,
Enric Balletbo <eballetb@redhat.com>,
Udit Kumar <u-kumar1@ti.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j784s4: Mark tps659413 regulators as bootph-all
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 21:05:05 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c9b46bc4-aa4f-47fa-8c88-4fd80b91386f@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240916-j784s4-tps6594-bootph-v3-0-ab70da0de7bd@redhat.com>
On 16-09-2024 22:44, Andrew Halaney wrote:
> This series marks tps659413's regulators as bootph-all in order for
> the nodes (and parent nodes) to be accessible during MCU's u-boot SPL.
>
> This in turn is desired since the tps659413 needs its MCU ESM
> state machine setup in order for the watchdog to reset the board.
>
> This took me a little while to track down, as enabling the ESM, TPS6594,
> etc in u-boot would result in the below boot failure:
>
> U-Boot SPL 2024.10-rc4-00007-g44b12cbcd1b3-dirty (Sep 06 2024 - 14:25:52 -0500)
> SYSFW ABI: 3.1 (firmware rev 0x0009 '9.2.4--v09.02.04 (Kool Koala)')
> Initialized 4 DRAM controllers
> SPL initial stack usage: 13408 bytes
> ### ERROR ### Please RESET the board ###
>
> Which turns out to actually have failed far earlier in spl_early_init(),
> due to these nodes not being accessible in u-boot. That's hard to tell
> though since console isn't setup until later (and for that reason I
> think spl_early_init()'s return value in j784s4_init.c isn't
> evaluated since a panic() at that point would leave a user with *no*
> information at all).
>
> I've tested this in conjunction with a u-boot series which I'll link in
> a follow-up response on the k3-j784s4-evm. I'd appreciate someone testing
> on the k3-am69-sk at a minimum, as it should suffer the same fate if things
> aren't setup appropriately.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - Added Udit's Tested-by tags
> - Reordered bootph-all to align with dts-coding-style (Beleswar)
Thanks for the change, LGTM. For the series,
Reviewed-by: Beleswar Padhi <b-padhi@ti.com>
Thanks,
Beleswar
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240911-j784s4-tps6594-bootph-v2-0-a83526264ab1@redhat.com
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Only mark the regulator nodes as bootph-all since parents are implied
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240906-j784s4-tps6594-bootph-v1-0-c5b58d43bf04@redhat.com
>
> ---
> Andrew Halaney (2):
> arm64: dts: ti: k3-j784s4-evm: Mark tps659413 regulators as bootph-all
> arm64: dts: ti: k3-am69-sk: Mark tps659413 regulators as bootph-all
>
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am69-sk.dts | 8 ++++++++
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j784s4-evm.dts | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
> ---
> base-commit: 7083504315d64199a329de322fce989e1e10f4f7
> change-id: 20240906-j784s4-tps6594-bootph-19d3f00fb98a
>
> Best regards,
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-10 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-16 17:14 [PATCH v3 0/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j784s4: Mark tps659413 regulators as bootph-all Andrew Halaney
2024-09-16 17:14 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j784s4-evm: " Andrew Halaney
2024-09-16 17:14 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am69-sk: " Andrew Halaney
2024-10-10 14:56 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j784s4: " Andrew Halaney
2024-10-29 10:28 ` Manorit Chawdhry
2024-10-10 15:35 ` Beleswar Prasad Padhi [this message]
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=c9b46bc4-aa4f-47fa-8c88-4fd80b91386f@ti.com \
--to=b-padhi@ti.com \
--cc=ahalaney@redhat.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=eballetb@redhat.com \
--cc=echanude@redhat.com \
--cc=j-keerthy@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=n-francis@ti.com \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=u-kumar1@ti.com \
--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