[PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: fix defines in pd_vio node for rk3399

[PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: fix defines in pd_vio node for rk3399

[Johan Jonker]

A test with the command below gives for example this error:

arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-evb.dt.yaml: pd_vio@15:
'pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPC0', 'pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPC1'
do not match any of the regexes:
'.*-names$', '.*-supply$', '^#.*-cells$',
'^#[a-zA-Z0-9,+\\-._]{0,63}$',
'^[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9,+\\-._]{0,63}$',
'^[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9,+\\-._]{0,63}@[0-9a-fA-F]+(,[0-9a-fA-F]+)*$',
'^__.*__$', 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'

Fix error by replacing the wrong defines by the ones
mentioned in 'rk3399-power.h'.

make -k ARCH=arm64 dtbs_check

Signed-off-by: Johan Jonker <jbx6244@gmail.com>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
index 8aac201f0..3dc8fe620 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
@@ -1087,12 +1087,12 @@
 					pm_qos = <&qos_isp1_m0>,
 						 <&qos_isp1_m1>;
 				};
-				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPC0 {
+				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPD0 {
 					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD0>;
 					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDCORE>,
 						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDPHY_REF>;
 				};
-				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPC1 {
+				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPD1 {
 					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD1>;
 					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDCORE>,
 						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDPHY_REF>;
-- 
2.11.0

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: fix defines in pd_vio node for rk3399

[Johan Jonker]

Hi,

The RK3399 TRM uses both

'pd_tcpc0, pd_tcpc1'

as

'pd_tcpd0, pd_tcpd1'.

What should we use here?

Thanks.

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
> index 8aac201f0..3dc8fe620 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
> @@ -1087,12 +1087,12 @@
>  					pm_qos = <&qos_isp1_m0>,
>  						 <&qos_isp1_m1>;
>  				};
> -				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPC0 {
> +				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPD0 {
>  					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD0>;
>  					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDCORE>,
>  						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDPHY_REF>;
>  				};
> -				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPC1 {
> +				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPD1 {
>  					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD1>;
>  					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDCORE>,
>  						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDPHY_REF>;
> -- 
> 2.11.0

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: fix defines in pd_vio node for rk3399

[Johan Jonker]

Hi,

Why is 'pd_tcpc0, pd_tcpc1' grouped under 'pd_vio' instead of VD_LOGIC?

Thanks

On 3/22/20 4:45 PM, Johan Jonker wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The RK3399 TRM uses both
> 
> 'pd_tcpc0, pd_tcpc1'
> 
> as
> 
> 'pd_tcpd0, pd_tcpd1'.
> 
> What should we use here?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
>> index 8aac201f0..3dc8fe620 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
>> @@ -1087,12 +1087,12 @@
>>  					pm_qos = <&qos_isp1_m0>,
>>  						 <&qos_isp1_m1>;
>>  				};
>> -				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPC0 {
>> +				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPD0 {
>>  					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD0>;
>>  					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDCORE>,
>>  						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDPHY_REF>;
>>  				};
>> -				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPC1 {
>> +				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPD1 {
>>  					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD1>;
>>  					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDCORE>,
>>  						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDPHY_REF>;
>> -- 
>> 2.11.0
> 

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: fix defines in pd_vio node for rk3399

[Heiko Stübner]

Am Sonntag, 22. März 2020, 17:14:54 CET schrieb Johan Jonker:
> Hi,
> 
> Why is 'pd_tcpc0, pd_tcpc1' grouped under 'pd_vio' instead of VD_LOGIC?

^^
You'll need to add Rockchip-people for that - I've done that now ;-)



> On 3/22/20 4:45 PM, Johan Jonker wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The RK3399 TRM uses both
> > 
> > 'pd_tcpc0, pd_tcpc1'
> > 
> > as
> > 
> > 'pd_tcpd0, pd_tcpd1'.
> > 
> > What should we use here?

We should probably just fix the nodename as you did.
- For one tcpD seems to be appearing way more often than tcpC
- and of course the header is part of the binding itself, so that shouldn't
  change without a really good reason


Heiko

> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
> >> index 8aac201f0..3dc8fe620 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi
> >> @@ -1087,12 +1087,12 @@
> >>  					pm_qos = <&qos_isp1_m0>,
> >>  						 <&qos_isp1_m1>;
> >>  				};
> >> -				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPC0 {
> >> +				pd_tcpc0@RK3399_PD_TCPD0 {
> >>  					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD0>;
> >>  					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDCORE>,
> >>  						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY0_TCPDPHY_REF>;
> >>  				};
> >> -				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPC1 {
> >> +				pd_tcpc1@RK3399_PD_TCPD1 {
> >>  					reg = <RK3399_PD_TCPD1>;
> >>  					clocks = <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDCORE>,
> >>  						 <&cru SCLK_UPHY1_TCPDPHY_REF>;
> > 
> 
>