Re: [PATCH v5 08/10] arm64: dts: qcom: Add initial support for MSM8917

[barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org]

On 2024-11-12 18:27, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 04:49:38PM +0100, Barnabás Czémán wrote:
>> From: Otto Pflüger <otto.pflueger@abscue.de>
>> 
>> Add initial support for MSM8917 SoC.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Otto Pflüger <otto.pflueger@abscue.de>
>> [reword commit, rebase, fix schema errors]
>> Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán <barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8917.dtsi | 1974 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 1974 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8917.dtsi 
>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8917.dtsi
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 
>> 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..cf0a0eec1141e11faca0ee9705d6348ab32a0f50
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8917.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,1974 @@
>> [...]
>> +		domain-idle-states {
>> +			cluster_sleep_0: cluster-sleep-0 {
>> +				compatible = "domain-idle-state";
>> +				arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x41000023>;
>> +				entry-latency-us = <700>;
>> +				exit-latency-us = <650>;
>> +				min-residency-us = <1972>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			cluster_sleep_1: cluster-sleep-1 {
>> +				compatible = "domain-idle-state";
>> +				arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x41000043>;
>> +				entry-latency-us = <240>;
>> +				exit-latency-us = <280>;
>> +				min-residency-us = <806>;
>> +			};
> 
> I think my comment here is still open:
> 
> This is strange, the deeper sleep state has lower timings than the
> previous one?
I was reordering based on Konrad comments when i have renamed the nodes 
maybe it is not correct then.
I am searching for how to validate these levels, i have find these
https://git.codelinaro.org/clo/la/kernel/msm-4.9/-/blob/LA.UM.10.6.2.c26-01500-89xx.0/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8917-pm.dtsi#L45-91
Do you know where can i find psci-suspend-param-s? Should I also add wfi 
level?
> 
>> +
>> +			cluster_sleep_2: cluster-sleep-2 {
>> +				compatible = "domain-idle-state";
>> +				arm,psci-suspend-param = <0x41000053>;
>> +				entry-latency-us = <700>;
>> +				exit-latency-us = <1000>;
>> +				min-residency-us = <6500>;
>> +			};
>> +		};
>> +
>> [...]
>> +		restart@4ab000 {
>> +			compatible = "qcom,pshold";
>> +			reg = <0x004ab000 0x4>;
>> +		};
> 
> This one too:
> 
> You have PSCI for shutting down, do you actually need this?
> 
>> +
>> +		tlmm: pinctrl@1000000 {
>> +			compatible = "qcom,msm8917-pinctrl";
>> +			reg = <0x01000000 0x300000>;
>> +			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 208 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> +			gpio-controller;
>> +			gpio-ranges = <&tlmm 0 0 134>;
>> +			#gpio-cells = <2>;
>> +			interrupt-controller;
>> +			#interrupt-cells = <2>;
>> +
>> [...]
>> +			sdc1_clk_on: sdc1-clk-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_clk";
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +				drive-strength = <16>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_clk_off: sdc1-clk-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_clk";
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_cmd_on: sdc1-cmd-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_cmd";
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +				drive-strength = <10>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_cmd_off: sdc1-cmd-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_cmd";
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_data_on: sdc1-data-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_data";
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +				drive-strength = <10>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_data_off: sdc1-data-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_data";
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_rclk_on: sdc1-rclk-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_rclk";
>> +				bias-pull-down;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc1_rclk_off: sdc1-rclk-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc1_rclk";
>> +				bias-pull-down;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc2_clk_on: sdc2-clk-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc2_clk";
>> +				drive-strength = <16>;
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc2_clk_off: sdc2-clk-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc2_clk";
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc2_cmd_on: sdc2-cmd-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc2_cmd";
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +				drive-strength = <10>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc2_cmd_off: sdc2-cmd-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc2_cmd";
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +			};
> 
> These are not referenced anywhere? Not here in the sdhc_X nodes, and
> also not in your msm8917-xiaomi-riva.dts. Would also recommend
> consolidating these to a single node like in msm8916.dtsi, see commit
> c943e4c58b2f ("arm64: dts: qcom: msm8916/39: Consolidate SDC pinctrl").
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c943e4c58b2ffb0dcd497f8b12f284f5e8fc477e
> 
>> +
>> +			sdc2_cd_on: cd-on-state {
>> +				pins = "gpio67";
>> +				function = "gpio";
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc2_cd_off: cd-off-state {
>> +				pins = "gpio67";
>> +				function = "gpio";
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +				bias-disable;
>> +			};
> 
> It does not make sense to have different on/off states for the card
> detect (CD) pin of the SD card. It needs to work even when the SD card
> is suspended so we can detect insertions/removals. Also should be 
> placed
> in the board-specific DT part.
> 
> See commit dfbda20dabaa ("arm64: dts: qcom: msm8916/39: Fix SD card
> detect pinctrl").
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=dfbda20dabaa1f284abd550035db5887384c8e4c
> 
> 
>> +
>> +			sdc2_data_on: sdc2-data-on-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc2_data";
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +				drive-strength = <10>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> +			sdc2_data_off: sdc2-data-off-state {
>> +				pins = "sdc2_data";
>> +				bias-pull-up;
>> +				drive-strength = <2>;
>> +			};
>> +
>> [...]
>> +		blsp1_i2c4: i2c@78b8000 {
>> +			compatible = "qcom,i2c-qup-v2.2.1";
>> +			reg = <0x078b8000 0x500>;
>> +			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 98 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> +			clocks = <&gcc GCC_BLSP1_QUP4_I2C_APPS_CLK>,
>> +				 <&gcc GCC_BLSP1_AHB_CLK>;
>> +			clock-names = "core", "iface";
>> +			dmas = <&blsp1_dma 10>, <&blsp1_dma 11>;
>> +			dma-names = "tx", "rx";
>> +			pinctrl-0 = <&blsp1_i2c4_default>;
>> +			pinctrl-1 = <&blsp1_i2c4_sleep>;
>> +			pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
>> +			#address-cells = <1>;
>> +			#size-cells = <0>;
>> +			status = "disabled";
>> +		};
>> +
>> +		blsp2_i2c5: i2c@7af5000 {
> 
> This is actually blsp2_i2c1 if you look at the clock name below:
> 
>> +			compatible = "qcom,i2c-qup-v2.2.1";
>> +			reg = <0x07af5000 0x600>;
>> +			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 299 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> +			clocks = <&gcc GCC_BLSP2_QUP1_I2C_APPS_CLK>,
> 
> here ^
> 
> But I realize now that the pinctrl functions are consecutively numbered
> without the BLSP number. Sorry for the confusion.
> 
> Basically:
>   - blsp1_i2c2 == blsp_i2c2
>   - blsp2_i2c1 == blsp_i2c5
> 
> Looking at some other examples upstream I guess you can choose between
> one of the following options:
> 
>  1. msm8974/msm8976/msm8996/msm8998: Use &blspX_i2cY labels for the 
> i2c@
>     node and pinctrl and only have the slightly confusing pinctrl
>     function. E.g. this in msm8976.dtsi:
> 
> 			/* 4 (not 6!) interfaces per QUP, BLSP2 indexes are numbered (n)+4 
> */
> 			blsp2_i2c2_default: blsp2-i2c2-default-state {
> 				pins = "gpio22", "gpio23";
> 				function = "blsp_i2c6";
> 				drive-strength = <2>;
> 				bias-disable;
> 			};
> 
>     Note how blsp2_i2c2 == blsp_i2c6.
> 
>  2. msm8994: Use &blspX_i2cY labels for the i2c@ node, but keep pinctrl
>     named &i2cN_default. E.g. this in msm8994.dtsi:
> 
> 		blsp2_i2c1: i2c@f9963000 {
> 			/* ... */
> 			pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
> 			pinctrl-0 = <&i2c7_default>;
> 			pinctrl-1 = <&i2c7_sleep>;
> 			/* ... */
> 		};
> 
>     Note how blsp2_i2c1 == i2c7_default here.
> 
>  3. msm8953: Use &i2c_N labels everywhere like on downstream. E.g. this
>     in msm8953.dtsi. This is pretty much what you had originally:
> 
> 		i2c_5: i2c@7af5000 {
> 			/* ... */
> 			pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
> 			pinctrl-0 = <&i2c_5_default>;
> 			pinctrl-1 = <&i2c_5_sleep>;
> 			/* ... */
> 		};
> 
> All of these are fine for me. Feel free to pick the one you prefer. But
> let's not introduce a new confusing variant of this. :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> Stephan