From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FAC8ECAAA1 for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 15:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229867AbiJWP3v (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Oct 2022 11:29:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52638 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229707AbiJWP3u (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Oct 2022 11:29:50 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A3162F39A for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 08:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id r19so4471385qtx.6 for ; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 08:29:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yVSP6kKHDAKLq9LSixfl+dhTMXefhH+oMJ46FKW4FMI=; b=SjKJSoHwqhV7MAnSKwEb3d7EOsu8jKc5Z2iUV1kmo5pAEdxV4//ChdnYRNhLO6aShP aENkC9oqyL7YftnBq2OLCv85f/gHm06tfFjbE5Yzp1qC1/DDLQfiMzdVpfWkEnjR/KR/ N/M15xIM4/amfbSRnroGuHOVtiL0Q0sKwuSnP0b3ql6X/EsaqkSu8LSgcWPI98Uco+FB U01R5AdO7c2x4z0vwPSfHY3uKn3n650Im/NSurIcjjae9b+f694AVrP1wN4jXFzDXwFp biqdBjUlEVcedhNsJQiPIsJZJ0mh0Dw5WDvk4lEvP9ZY51g6o+WxSIIbBqW3ItRRyDq+ /KNw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yVSP6kKHDAKLq9LSixfl+dhTMXefhH+oMJ46FKW4FMI=; b=b4r4f6j8JFvBVCi8Ck83uxna2/ngAHNwUL5o/E/fctK+JdIGbWukTM3jEZhQAUlGyT 2xZ54z/au/JrWauTRMn0vPWLLhYF+tmJFBZwhXWAdQtJookngMLq5f7tV8y9jzPphE/V EcmvSchkst/WZpc0B5do1P5L7rRNU6LtyA9BAirHBlfuYMgtT4T7G//OwYvH8G8Sa2Yh Grutekh96CIdiLCk65/2cL2TIYgE8M79ZwPfxk9nMCuruNbY7t/kmHLgT4LiyNbHRLzO InJdr7D91DwDK6nmID17xAqiXNLeJkYIr2mnncPLNyZgPoq4vzyAxP4HV+ZPD0XHmxsH PvHg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3Rfnx5iHZ2tbzlIZVw7+PWGG2f245EEXMOkNztpZIJSs8Ddr4L 2DJWI8XcwAxbRXw+MF64U4HX2A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM64TApOWpxw428QRVSCNRXKtG8fHkANR4PG0rwjoOBHXW7sy3qOh854tIP4bIfvL5fuRer27Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1983:b0:39c:d680:8197 with SMTP id u3-20020a05622a198300b0039cd6808197mr24412010qtc.7.1666538988296; Sun, 23 Oct 2022 08:29:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([64.57.193.93]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q1-20020a05620a0d8100b006ec62032d3dsm13366966qkl.30.2022.10.23.08.29.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Oct 2022 08:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <261cd2fb-05dc-3772-dcc7-3ab1f3c0222c@linaro.org> Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 11:29:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: pwm: mediatek: Add compatible string for MT7986 Content-Language: en-US To: Daniel Golle Cc: Rob Herring , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thierry Reding , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=c3=b6nig?= , Matthias Brugger , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <20221021222338.GA565200-robh@kernel.org> <5182e3c4-9e5e-2c36-408b-9029c65c8803@linaro.org> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 23/10/2022 11:01, Daniel Golle wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 08:39:34AM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 23/10/2022 08:24, Daniel Golle wrote: >>> Hi Krzysztof, >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 12:35:25PM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 21/10/2022 18:58, Daniel Golle wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 05:23:38PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 04:25:18PM +0100, Daniel Golle wrote: >>>>>>> Add new compatible string for MT7986 PWM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-mediatek.txt | 1 + >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-mediatek.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-mediatek.txt >>>>>>> index 554c96b6d0c3e0..6f4e60c9e18b81 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-mediatek.txt >>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-mediatek.txt >>>>>>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Required properties: >>>>>>> - "mediatek,mt7623-pwm": found on mt7623 SoC. >>>>>>> - "mediatek,mt7628-pwm": found on mt7628 SoC. >>>>>>> - "mediatek,mt7629-pwm": found on mt7629 SoC. >>>>>>> + - "mediatek,mt7986-pwm": found on mt7986 SoC. >>>>>> >>>>>> This version of the PWM h/w is not compatible with any of the existing >>>>>> chips? If it is, it should have a fallback compatible. >>>>> >>>>> No, it is unique because it comes with just 2 PWM channels. >>>>> Otherwise the driver behaves just like for MT8183 (4 channels) or >>>>> MT8365 (3 channels) which also got distinct compatible strings. >>>> >>>> Then something would be here compatible. E.g. If you bound MT8183 with >>>> mt7986-pwm compatible, would you get working device with two channels? >>> >>> Yes, but I'd see another 2 channels which do not work, accessing them >>> may even cause problems (I haven't tried that) as it means accessing >>> an undocumented memory range of the SoC which we in general we >>> shouldn't be messing around with. >> >> Why on MT8183 there would be undocumented memory? Where is undocumented >> memory? > > So we were talking about using the MT8183 compatible for MT7986 SoC, as > the PWM units are identical apart from the number of channels they > offer: No, we talk about MT8183 with mt7986-pwm compatible. Read again my message. > > MT7986 got 2 PWM channels. The MMIO registers used for those two > channels start at offsets 0x10 (pwm0) and 0x50 (pwm1) > > MT8183 got 4 PWM channels. The MMIO registers used for those four > channels start of offsets 0x10 (pwm0), 0x50 (pwm1), 0x90 (pwm2) and > 0xd0 (pwm3). > > Hence, when using the MT8183 compatible with MT7986, the driver will > access offsets 0x90 and 0xd0 in case the users enables the (bogus) > outputs pwm2 and pwm3. These offsets, however, are not mentioned in the > datasheet, so it has to be considered that writing things to these > undocumented offsets could cause unknown behavior. > > I hope it's more clear now what I mean. But even your case is not correct. On MT7986 the device would still have 2 channels, how the heck he would get 4? Driver binds to ,t7986-pwm compatible, which defines 2 channels. > >> >>> >>> Also note that this case is the same as MT8183 vs. MT8365, they got >>> distinct compatible strings and also for those two the only difference >>> is the number of channels. >> >> So why they are not made compatible? > > My guess is that it's for this very reason: > To correctly communicate the capabilities (in this case: number of > channels) to the driver and not have bogus pwmX show up in the OS > which then causes undocumented MMIO register access in case anyone > tries to actually use them. No, that's not correct reason. There would be no wrong MMIO access and capabilities would be still correctly communicated. > >> >>> >>>> >>>> If so, they are compatible. >>> >>> By that definition you should remove the additional compatible for >>> MT8365 or rather, it should have been rejected for the same argument. >>> >>> I'm talking about >>> commit fe00faee8060402a3d85aed95775e16838a6dad2 >>> commit 394b517585da9fbb2eea2f2103ff47d37321e976 >> >> This is a pattern spreading in several Mediatek bindings and we already >> commented on new patches. I don't know why people working on Mediatek do >> not mark pieces compatible. > > Others will have to answer that for you. > > To me this looks a bit like a structural shortcoming of the PWM controller > bindings: if there was a way to tell the driver "hey, this is like MT8183, > but it got only two channels" that would solve it nicely. > This could either be done using child-nodes for each PWM channel or by > simply adding a 'nr-pwms' property. No, it's rather someone did not think about Devicetree compatibles or did not care to design the Mediatek bindings and just copy-paste existing pattern... Best regards, Krzysztof