From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com (lelv0143.ext.ti.com [198.47.23.248]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F65D2575F; Thu, 8 Aug 2024 09:21:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.23.248 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723108866; cv=none; b=NXXEjgLBi1OBVBvrDZ+XfvrM58x3e1vACdyP9APC475OyQBUZ6azDoAaUr8tH6B8Mci+qtC+d6eMBHWOdSFit6T2oWpQP7XJgnx3p80MB4qvIMcja+yyJhvPV7yzD36z5jPHzPiPbuXdOfBhWyOl85pLiXHB/uECmKqixwaOoR0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723108866; c=relaxed/simple; bh=imq1AiFHmG2TQHVtGq0TdcADRTAqGvAXQKIy6Q6VUBA=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=A8NBkEipTGTdoZkjx1PEg5kBnDgrTNDQjMtP0L1U//iFrr9YdU2XN4RboWRiu+QAA3HcbIkk0e0OYDu+uYmxFIE/omdzSlPiWeQNSMOnGuo4DmM+mWznc1TFSYL8xdxgjqdgFFZcOSdKxVCfoT+sTILx8W4yXnOr0z73bBMruBY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b=JAGTyR6C; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.23.248 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="JAGTyR6C" Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 4789KtS3107112; Thu, 8 Aug 2024 04:20:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1723108855; bh=W0/THron0rfDFCIl1FOT38fmOl3uIJ4DHfKFYOF/uTo=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=JAGTyR6CssW6R+7F6TvXdrb8MY2X3x2eCUTXlypRNFNXi69xhbk3LEIkJ6BDQFnUJ +ea2OfWejF+otcYEVQs4OptZQx2o/BCeHVhAiVW21tPwktQWeBLv4PfNzOV9pSEO9k 7E7UaDT7PtZOE1+E74eECEfJl1FYetLWPKim0+y8= Received: from DFLE110.ent.ti.com (dfle110.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.31]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 4789Kt5l021688 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 8 Aug 2024 04:20:55 -0500 Received: from DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) by DFLE110.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Thu, 8 Aug 2024 04:20:55 -0500 Received: from lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.249) by DFLE114.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 8 Aug 2024 04:20:55 -0500 Received: from localhost (uda0497581.dhcp.ti.com [10.24.68.185]) by lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 4789KstJ059303; Thu, 8 Aug 2024 04:20:55 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 14:50:54 +0530 From: Manorit Chawdhry To: "Limaye, Aniket" CC: Nishanth Menon , Vignesh Raghavendra , Tero Kristo , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , , , , Neha Malcom Francis , Udit Kumar , Beleswar Padhi , Siddharth Vadapalli Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200*: Add bootph-* properties Message-ID: <20240808092054.7x62hy5twrwmadv6@uda0497581> References: <20240730-b4-upstream-bootph-all-v3-0-9bc2eccb6952@ti.com> <20240730-b4-upstream-bootph-all-v3-5-9bc2eccb6952@ti.com> <1cee1ebf-8281-440a-bf45-baa9b0e3b68f@ti.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1cee1ebf-8281-440a-bf45-baa9b0e3b68f@ti.com> X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Hi Aniket, On 20:07-20240807, Limaye, Aniket wrote: > Hi Manorit, > > On 7/30/2024 3:23 PM, Manorit Chawdhry wrote: > > Adds bootph-* properties to the leaf nodes to enable U-boot to > > utilise them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry > > --- > > .../arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-common-proc-board.dts | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-main.dtsi | 2 ++ > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-som-p0.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > > 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > > index 5097d192c2b2..f8a5ad4737da 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi > > @@ -21,16 +21,19 @@ dmsc: system-controller@44083000 { > > Referring to the thread from v2 [0], I see that you have removed the > bootph-all from the parent dmsc node. With current patch j7200-evm fails to > boot (Stuck somewhere in tispl or right after that) as discussed in the same > thread [0]. > > I have boot tested this patch (SD boot) and the device boots with an > additional bootph-all at dmsc node. > > I assume the removal was done intentionally, meaning we intend to fix the > bug in u-boot or carry the one extra bootph-all there. If NOT, please add > the same in the parent dmsc node here as well. Yes, the removal was intentional and there is a fix that can be done in U-boot for this so we'll take that up there. Thanks for reviewing! Regards, Manorit > > So taking care of the above, > > Reviewed-by: Aniket Limaye > > [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240709084857.nf7c57mi6miajeau@uda0497581/