Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: add attiny_rst_gate to Ringneck

[Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>]

Hi Jakob,

On 2/1/24 1:44 PM, Jakob Unterwurzacher wrote:
> Ringneck v1.4 can contain (placement option) an on-board ATtiny
> microcontroller instead of an STM32. In normal operation, this
> is transparent to the software, as both microcontrollers emulate
> the same ICs (amc6821 and isl1208).
> 
> For flashing the ATtiny, the SWITCH_REG1 regulator of the board's PMIC is
> used to enable the ATtiny UPDI debug interface. If the STM32 is placed, or if
> we are running on an older Ringneck revision, SWITCH_REG1 is not connected
> and has no effect.
> 
> Add attiny-updi-gate-regulator so userspace can control it via sysfs:
> 
>    echo enabled > /sys/devices/platform/attiny-updi-gate-regulator/state
> 

CONFIG_REGULATOR_USERSPACE_CONSUMER needs to be enabled for this to 
work. Just putting this here as I had forgotten and was wondering why 
this sysfs file wasn't available to me :)

> Signed-off-by: Jakob Unterwurzacher <jakob.unterwurzacher@theobroma-systems.com>

I finally have access to some HW to test this, and therefore can give my:

Tested-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>

> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/px30-ringneck.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/px30-ringneck.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/px30-ringneck.dtsi
> index dec29a75d361..1f7f4b2ea66a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/px30-ringneck.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/px30-ringneck.dtsi
> @@ -15,6 +15,12 @@ aliases {
>   		rtc1 = &rk809;
>   	};
>   
> +	/* allows userspace to control the gate of the ATtiny UPDI pass FET via sysfs */
> +	attiny-updi-gate-regulator {
> +		compatible = "regulator-output";
> +		vout-supply = <&vg_attiny_updi>;
> +	};
> +
>   	emmc_pwrseq: emmc-pwrseq {
>   		compatible = "mmc-pwrseq-emmc";
>   		pinctrl-0 = <&emmc_reset>;
> @@ -146,6 +152,7 @@ rk809: pmic@20 {
>   		vcc5-supply = <&vcc_3v3>;
>   		vcc6-supply = <&vcc_3v3>;
>   		vcc7-supply = <&vcc_3v3>;
> +		vcc8-supply = <&vcc5v0_sys>;

According to the schematics, vcc8 is routed to SWITCH_REG2 and not 
SWITCH_REG1, which is fed vcc9. Even more so, vcc8 on the PMIC isn't 
actually routed.

I therefore think we can simply remove this line here.

@Jakob, do you agree? Can you send a v2 if so?

Cheers,
Quentin