From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [TEGRA194_CPUFREQ Patch 1/3] firmware: tegra: adding function to get BPMP data Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:18:00 +0200 Message-ID: <20200427071800.GA3451400@ulmo> References: <1575394348-17649-1-git-send-email-sumitg@nvidia.com> <20191203174229.GA1721849@ulmo> <9404232d-84ce-a117-89dd-f2d8de80993e@kapsi.fi> <20191204091703.d32to5omdm3eynon@vireshk-i7> <20191204093339.GA2784830@ulmo> <20191204095138.rrul5vxnkprfwmku@vireshk-i7> <20200407100520.GA1720957@ulmo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200407100520.GA1720957@ulmo> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring , Viresh Kumar , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Mikko Perttunen , Sumit Gupta , catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, will-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, jonathanh-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, talho-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-pm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, bbasu-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mperttunen-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 12:05:20PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 03:21:38PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 04-12-19, 10:33, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > Yeah, the code that registers this device is in drivers/base/cpu.c in > > > register_cpu(). It even retrieves the device tree node for the CPU fr= om > > > device tree and stores it in cpu->dev.of_node, so we should be able to > > > just pass &cpu->dev to tegra_bpmp_get() in order to retrieve a refere= nce > > > to the BPMP. > > >=20 > > > That said, I'm wondering if perhaps we could just add a compatible > > > string to the /cpus node for cases like this where we don't have an > > > actual device representing the CPU complex. There are a number of CPU > > > frequency drivers that register dummy devices just so that they have > > > something to bind a driver to. > > >=20 > > > If we allow the /cpus node to represent the CPU complex (if no other > > > "device" does that yet), we can add a compatible string and have the > > > cpufreq driver match on that. > > >=20 > > > Of course this would be slightly difficult to retrofit into existing > > > drivers because they'd need to remain backwards compatible with exist= ing > > > device trees. But it would allow future drivers to do this a little m= ore > > > elegantly. For some SoCs this may not matter, but especially once you > > > start depending on additional resources this would come in handy. > > >=20 > > > Adding Rob and the device tree mailing list for feedback on this idea. > >=20 > > Took some time to find this thread, but something around this was > > suggested by Rafael earlier. > >=20 > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8139001.Q4eV8YG1Il-sKB8Sp2ER+y1GS7QM15AGw@public.gmane.org/ >=20 > I gave this a try and came up with the following: >=20 > --- >8 --- > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/d= ts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi > index f4ede86e32b4..e4462f95f0b3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194.dtsi > @@ -1764,6 +1764,9 @@ bpmp_thermal: thermal { > }; > =20 > cpus { > + compatible =3D "nvidia,tegra194-ccplex"; > + nvidia,bpmp =3D <&bpmp>; > + > #address-cells =3D <1>; > #size-cells =3D <0>; > =20 > --- >8 --- >=20 > Now I can do something rougly like this, although I have a more complete > patch locally that also gets rid of all the global variables because we > now actually have a struct platform_device that we can anchor everything > at: >=20 > --- >8 --- > static const struct of_device_id tegra194_cpufreq_of_match[] =3D { > { .compatible =3D "nvidia,tegra194-ccplex", }, > { /* sentinel */ } > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tegra194_cpufreq_of_match); >=20 > static struct platform_driver tegra194_ccplex_driver =3D { > .driver =3D { > .name =3D "tegra194-cpufreq", > .of_match_table =3D tegra194_cpufreq_of_match, > }, > .probe =3D tegra194_cpufreq_probe, > .remove =3D tegra194_cpufreq_remove, > }; > module_platform_driver(tegra194_ccplex_driver); > --- >8 --- >=20 > I don't think that's exactly what Rafael (Cc'ed) had in mind, since the > above thread seems to have mostly talked about binding a driver to each > individual CPU. >=20 > But this seems a lot better than having to instantiate a device from > scratch just so that a driver can bind to it and it allows additional > properties to be associated with the CCPLEX device. >=20 > Rob, any thoughts on this from a device tree point of view? The /cpus > bindings don't mention the compatible property, but there doesn't seem > to be anything in the bindings that would prohibit its use. >=20 > If we can agree on that, I can forward my local changes to Sumit for > inclusion or reference. Rob, do you see any reason why we shouldn't be able to use a compatible string in the /cpus node for devices such as Tegra194 where there is no dedicated hardware block for the CCPLEX? Thierry --r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEiOrDCAFJzPfAjcif3SOs138+s6EFAl6mhyUACgkQ3SOs138+ s6E+QhAApPHiPfSUuUkQgv2VAlF2+HUgVeHwtL5RjQhzcO2s/kaj5v9Cu2xSRvLh GMg4cEYg8NBv4wDXxtm/OVf4+S5BKs1pX0vyM1xMhiUWgwAPTfkIxoQFmxUCoJUj LAvCrk1kgGI3dOUdLNoAJh78o6J/OsNbCMlhi2q80RWYnJ9ckrqt6SsTmeHoegKb 9ftQoIfO4amqE56unSmbGL3/ebn3UbqM7JSuPe3LZNj5vxGz9Rz9l8DD6Oz+kVXq E50KsubpwNUovQfJaBBN+63uLbTKbPtYSPoABTUG2N2KoY/q5vCgoeykCJu00LD1 yCZAJC+nG+paY+N29gUkfKloj249xu86thaRf7i0lVNWSgLkcB9Jc4T0aFdriBE/ wZHOJn39TpeHlok8IKuH5WHbwN4psYT9mXKrfDf2ZyQEytl+llD16oedc6QdcWhd Qxrtfx6oa1hcKNPsngIukOAe8pzO438/AXpadny5aO9wMYpzZyjfsiCLpSKw+yBR LuR2nPripZLEeIiD1uQZTnPJkMoCnEUgrxgAXbYqsJKScso3bTJDJgGbl3tW87cF XR3ZZzMNsfQ9emD8/ps0P1x825v9m6kkL36eoS9A9ueXG/lMJQhQBuK/6l8HjHGd vnFCTI6FVTQVgMNDJrero/MX4rqFeBc1WBE2pC0iGx0LIntAQSU= =U6Hg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --r5Pyd7+fXNt84Ff3--