Re: [PATCH 7/8] arm64: dts: qcom: ipq9574: Add USB related nodes

Varadarajan Narayanan
2023-03-06T11:27:05Z

Dmitry,

On 3/2/2023 9:52 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 11:57, Varadarajan Narayanan
> <quic_varada@quicinc.com> wrote:
>> Add USB phy and controller related nodes
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <quic_varada@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574.dtsi | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 92 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574.dtsi
>> index 2bb4053..319b5bd 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq9574.dtsi
>> @@ -215,6 +215,98 @@
>> #size-cells = <1>;
>> ranges = <0 0 0 0xffffffff>;
>>
>> + ssphy_0: ssphy@7D000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-qmp-usb3-phy";
>> + reg = <0x7D000 0x1C4>;
>> + #clock-cells = <1>;
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges;
>> +
>> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_USB0_AUX_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_USB0_PHY_CFG_AHB_CLK>;
>> + clock-names = "aux", "cfg_ahb";
>> +
>> + resets = <&gcc GCC_USB0_PHY_BCR>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_USB3PHY_0_PHY_BCR>;
>> + reset-names = "phy","common";
>> + status = "disabled";
>> +
>> + usb0_ssphy: lane@7D200 {
> Please use newer style device bindings for new PHYs.
>
>> + reg = <0x0007D200 0x130>, /* Tx */
>> + <0x0007D400 0x200>, /* Rx */
>> + <0x0007D800 0x1F8>, /* PCS */
>> + <0x0007D600 0x044>; /* PCS misc */
>> + #phy-cells = <0>;
>> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_USB0_PIPE_CLK>;
>> + clock-names = "pipe0";
>> + clock-output-names = "gcc_usb0_pipe_clk_src";
> No, this clock doesn't originate from gcc, so the gcc prefix is incorrect.
>
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + qusb_phy_0: qusb@7B000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-qusb2-phy";
>> + reg = <0x07B000 0x180>;
>> + #phy-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_USB0_PHY_CFG_AHB_CLK>,
>> + <&xo_board_clk>;
>> + clock-names = "cfg_ahb", "ref";
>> +
>> + resets = <&gcc GCC_QUSB2_0_PHY_BCR>;
>> + status = "disabled";
>> + };
>> +
>> + usb3: usb3@8A00000 {
> You know the drill. This node is in the wrong place.
>
>> + compatible = "qcom,dwc3";
>> + reg = <0x8AF8800 0x400>;
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges;
>> +
>> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_SNOC_USB_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_ANOC_USB_AXI_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_USB0_MASTER_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_USB0_SLEEP_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_USB0_MOCK_UTMI_CLK>;
>> +
>> + clock-names = "sys_noc_axi",
>> + "anoc_axi",
>> + "master",
>> + "sleep",
>> + "mock_utmi";
> Please fix the indentation of the lists.
>
>> +
>> + assigned-clocks = <&gcc GCC_SNOC_USB_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_ANOC_USB_AXI_CLK>,
> Why do you assign clock rates to the NOC clocks? Should they be set
> using the interconnect instead?

The SNOC and ANOC run at a fixed speed of 350MHz and 342MHz respectively
and are not scaled. These clocks are for the interface between the USB
block and the SNOC/ANOC. Do we still need to use interconnect?

>> + <&gcc GCC_USB0_MASTER_CLK>,
>> + <&gcc GCC_USB0_MOCK_UTMI_CLK>;
>> + assigned-clock-rates = <200000000>,
>> + <200000000>,
>> + <200000000>,
>> + <24000000>;
>> +
>> + resets = <&gcc GCC_USB_BCR>;
>> + status = "disabled";
>> +
>> + dwc_0: dwc3@8A00000 {
>> + compatible = "snps,dwc3";
>> + reg = <0x8A00000 0xcd00>;
>> + clock-names = "ref";
>> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_USB0_MOCK_UTMI_CLK>;
> clocks before clock-names
>
>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 140 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> + phys = <&qusb_phy_0>, <&usb0_ssphy>;
>> + phy-names = "usb2-phy", "usb3-phy";
>> + tx-fifo-resize;
>> + snps,dis_ep_cache_eviction;
>> + snps,is-utmi-l1-suspend;
>> + snps,hird-threshold = /bits/ 8 <0x0>;
>> + snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk;
>> + snps,dis_u3_susphy_quirk;
>> + snps,quirk-frame-length-adjustment = <0x0A87F0A0>;
>> + dr_mode = "host";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> pcie0_phy: phy@84000 {
>> compatible = "qcom,ipq9574-qmp-gen3x1-pcie-phy";
>> reg = <0x00084000 0x1bc>; /* Serdes PLL */
>> --
>> 2.7.4

Will address these and post a new revision.

Thanks

Varada