public inbox for linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: qianfanguijin <qianfanguijin@163.com>
To: linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev>,
	 andre.przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Cc: "jernej.skrabec@gmail.com" <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
	 samuel <samuel@sholland.org>,  wens <wens@kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC] Allwinner T536 initial support & pinctrl register layout redesign
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2026 18:57:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <202604161857186497478@163.com> (raw)

Hi everyone,

I'm reaching out to see if there's any interest in supporting the Allwinner T536, an industrial-grade SoC featuring a quad-core Cortex-A55. I'm currently working on an upstream Linux kernel port for this chip.

Progress so far:

    Basic CCU support
    pinctrl (GPIO and IRQ)
    UART console
    Successfully boots a minimal initramfs

The T536 introduces a redesigned GPIO register layout that is incompatible with the register mapping used by currently supported Allwinner SoCs. To accommodate this, I've refactored relevant register-related information into the pinctrl ops structure.

Andre, I heavily referenced your recent work on the A523 during development. Could you confirm whether GPIO interrupts are currently functional on A523? In my testing on the T536, I noticed that when irq_read_needs_mux is configured, the IRQ multiplexing mode is incorrectly set to 6, which breaks interrupt handling. I don't have access to A523 hardware for verification, but it appears this logic may need adjustment. Any insights or testing feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Due to the GPIO subsystem redesign, I've made several modifications to the sunxi-pinctrl driver. A work-in-progress tree is available for review here: https://github.com/qianfan-Zhao/linux/tree/t536

I would appreciate your review and guidance on the upstreaming strategy:

    Should the pinctrl/register layout changes be submitted and merged first as a foundation?
    Or is it preferred to hold off until broader T536 support is complete?

Any feedback on the code structure, IRQ handling, or submission workflow would be extremely helpful. I'll format and send proper patches via git send-email once the direction is confirmed.

Thanks in advance for your time and guidance.






             reply	other threads:[~2026-04-16 11:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-16 10:57 qianfanguijin [this message]
2026-04-16 22:10 ` [RFC] Allwinner T536 initial support & pinctrl register layout redesign Andre Przywara
2026-04-17  2:50   ` qianfanguijin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=202604161857186497478@163.com \
    --to=qianfanguijin@163.com \
    --cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
    --cc=jernej.skrabec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=samuel@sholland.org \
    --cc=wens@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox