* [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite
@ 2024-12-11 6:09 FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 6:36 ` Dragan Simic
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: FUKAUMI Naoki @ 2024-12-11 6:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: heiko
Cc: robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, macromorgan, jonas, andyshrk,
liujianfeng1994, dsimic, tim, devicetree, linux-rockchip,
FUKAUMI Naoki
The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
perspective.
Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
- const: radxa,rock-5b
- const: rockchip,rk3588
- - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
+ - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
items:
- const: radxa,rock-5c
- const: rockchip,rk3588s
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite
2024-12-11 6:09 [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite FUKAUMI Naoki
@ 2024-12-11 6:36 ` Dragan Simic
2024-12-11 6:44 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dragan Simic @ 2024-12-11 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FUKAUMI Naoki
Cc: heiko, robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, macromorgan, jonas, andyshrk,
liujianfeng1994, tim, devicetree, linux-rockchip
Hello Fukaumi,
On 2024-12-11 07:09, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
> Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
> perspective.
>
> Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
> index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
> @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
> - const: radxa,rock-5b
> - const: rockchip,rk3588
>
> - - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
> + - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
> items:
> - const: radxa,rock-5c
> - const: rockchip,rk3588s
I think it would be better to use "rockchip,rk3582" here, to allow
us to possibly use that information later. For example, we might
want to be able to recognize RK3582-based boards in U-Boot without
the need to look into the e-fuses at some point, for which purpose
having a clear designator in the DT would fit perfectly.
As a reminder, using "rockchip,rk3582" would also require a small
addition to drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite
2024-12-11 6:36 ` Dragan Simic
@ 2024-12-11 6:44 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 7:02 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 7:14 ` Dragan Simic
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: FUKAUMI Naoki @ 2024-12-11 6:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dragan Simic
Cc: heiko, robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, macromorgan, jonas, andyshrk,
liujianfeng1994, tim, devicetree, linux-rockchip
Hi Dragan,
On 12/11/24 15:36, Dragan Simic wrote:
> Hello Fukaumi,
>
> On 2024-12-11 07:09, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>> The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
>> Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
>> perspective.
>>
>> Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
>> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
>> - const: radxa,rock-5b
>> - const: rockchip,rk3588
>>
>> - - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
>> + - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
>> items:
>> - const: radxa,rock-5c
>> - const: rockchip,rk3588s
>
> I think it would be better to use "rockchip,rk3582" here, to allow
> us to possibly use that information later. For example, we might
> want to be able to recognize RK3582-based boards in U-Boot without
> the need to look into the e-fuses at some point, for which purpose
> having a clear designator in the DT would fit perfectly.
It may be okay to introduce "rockchip,rk3582", but reading e-fuse is
still required in U-Boot because which unit (cpu coreX, gpu, etc) is
broken cannot be determined without reading e-fuse at run-time.
Best regards,
--
FUKAUMI Naoki
Radxa Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
> As a reminder, using "rockchip,rk3582" would also require a small
> addition to drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite
2024-12-11 6:44 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
@ 2024-12-11 7:02 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 7:15 ` Dragan Simic
2024-12-11 7:14 ` Dragan Simic
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: FUKAUMI Naoki @ 2024-12-11 7:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dragan Simic
Cc: heiko, robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, macromorgan, jonas, andyshrk,
liujianfeng1994, tim, devicetree, linux-rockchip
just FYI,
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/?q=e52c
--
FUKAUMI Naoki
Radxa Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
On 12/11/24 15:44, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> Hi Dragan,
>
> On 12/11/24 15:36, Dragan Simic wrote:
>> Hello Fukaumi,
>>
>> On 2024-12-11 07:09, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>>> The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
>>> Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
>>> perspective.
>>>
>>> Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
>>> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
>>> - const: radxa,rock-5b
>>> - const: rockchip,rk3588
>>>
>>> - - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
>>> + - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
>>> items:
>>> - const: radxa,rock-5c
>>> - const: rockchip,rk3588s
>>
>> I think it would be better to use "rockchip,rk3582" here, to allow
>> us to possibly use that information later. For example, we might
>> want to be able to recognize RK3582-based boards in U-Boot without
>> the need to look into the e-fuses at some point, for which purpose
>> having a clear designator in the DT would fit perfectly.
>
> It may be okay to introduce "rockchip,rk3582", but reading e-fuse is
> still required in U-Boot because which unit (cpu coreX, gpu, etc) is
> broken cannot be determined without reading e-fuse at run-time.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> FUKAUMI Naoki
> Radxa Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
>
>> As a reminder, using "rockchip,rk3582" would also require a small
>> addition to drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c.
>>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite
2024-12-11 6:44 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 7:02 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
@ 2024-12-11 7:14 ` Dragan Simic
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dragan Simic @ 2024-12-11 7:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FUKAUMI Naoki
Cc: heiko, robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, macromorgan, jonas, andyshrk,
liujianfeng1994, tim, devicetree, linux-rockchip
On 2024-12-11 07:44, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> On 12/11/24 15:36, Dragan Simic wrote:
>> On 2024-12-11 07:09, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>>> The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
>>> Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
>>> perspective.
>>>
>>> Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
>>> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>> @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
>>> - const: radxa,rock-5b
>>> - const: rockchip,rk3588
>>>
>>> - - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
>>> + - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
>>> items:
>>> - const: radxa,rock-5c
>>> - const: rockchip,rk3588s
>>
>> I think it would be better to use "rockchip,rk3582" here, to allow
>> us to possibly use that information later. For example, we might
>> want to be able to recognize RK3582-based boards in U-Boot without
>> the need to look into the e-fuses at some point, for which purpose
>> having a clear designator in the DT would fit perfectly.
>
> It may be okay to introduce "rockchip,rk3582", but reading e-fuse is
> still required in U-Boot because which unit (cpu coreX, gpu, etc) is
> broken cannot be determined without reading e-fuse at run-time.
Sure, but I think it would be rather bad to miss this opportunity
to introduce a clear DT designator for RK3582-based boards. It's
better to have the designator unused, than to bang our heads later,
if we conclude that we need it at some point. :)
>> As a reminder, using "rockchip,rk3582" would also require a small
>> addition to drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite
2024-12-11 7:02 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
@ 2024-12-11 7:15 ` Dragan Simic
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dragan Simic @ 2024-12-11 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FUKAUMI Naoki
Cc: heiko, robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, macromorgan, jonas, andyshrk,
liujianfeng1994, tim, devicetree, linux-rockchip
On 2024-12-11 08:02, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> just FYI,
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/?q=e52c
AFAICT, it isn't too late to introduce "rockchip,rk3582". :)
> On 12/11/24 15:44, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>> On 12/11/24 15:36, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>> On 2024-12-11 07:09, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>>>> The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
>>>> Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
>>>> perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK
>>>> 5C")
>>>> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>>> index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>>>> @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
>>>> - const: radxa,rock-5b
>>>> - const: rockchip,rk3588
>>>>
>>>> - - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
>>>> + - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
>>>> items:
>>>> - const: radxa,rock-5c
>>>> - const: rockchip,rk3588s
>>>
>>> I think it would be better to use "rockchip,rk3582" here, to allow
>>> us to possibly use that information later. For example, we might
>>> want to be able to recognize RK3582-based boards in U-Boot without
>>> the need to look into the e-fuses at some point, for which purpose
>>> having a clear designator in the DT would fit perfectly.
>>
>> It may be okay to introduce "rockchip,rk3582", but reading e-fuse
>> is still required in U-Boot because which unit (cpu coreX, gpu, etc)
>> is broken cannot be determined without reading e-fuse at run-time.
>>
>>> As a reminder, using "rockchip,rk3582" would also require a small
>>> addition to drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-12-11 7:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-12-11 6:09 [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 6:36 ` Dragan Simic
2024-12-11 6:44 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 7:02 ` FUKAUMI Naoki
2024-12-11 7:15 ` Dragan Simic
2024-12-11 7:14 ` Dragan Simic
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox