Hi Nishanth,
On 01/09/20 8:22 pm, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On 19:36-20200901, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
Add PCIe device tree node (both RC and EP) for the four
PCIe instances here.
Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kis...@ti.com>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi | 218 ++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi | 5 +-
2 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Did you look at the diff of the dtbs_check before and after this
series? I see: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/9fyfrTjx9M/
I didn't see any errors when I checked for individual bindings
a0393678@a0393678-ssd:~/repos/linux$ mkconfig64 dtbs_check
DT_SCHEMA_FILES="Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-ep.yaml"
SCHEMA Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema.yaml
DTC arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
DTC arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
CHECK arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
CHECK arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
a0393678@a0393678-ssd:~/repos/linux$ mkconfig64 dtbs_check
DT_SCHEMA_FILES="Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml"
SCHEMA Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema.yaml
DTC arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
DTC arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
CHECK arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dt.yaml
CHECK arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-common-proc-board.dt.yaml
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
index 00a36a14efe7..a36909d8b8c3 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
@@ -28,6 +28,26 @@
#size-cells = <1>;
ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x00100000 0x1c000>;
+ pcie0_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@4070 {
https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/releases/download/v0.3/devicetree-specification-v0.3.pdf
Section 2.2.2: why not use syscon@4070 and so on?
okay, will change to generic name.
+ compatible = "syscon";
+ reg = <0x00004070 0x4>;
+ };
+
+ pcie1_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@4074 {
+ compatible = "syscon";
+ reg = <0x00004074 0x4>;
+ };
+
+ pcie2_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@4078 {
+ compatible = "syscon";
+ reg = <0x00004078 0x4>;
+ };
+
+ pcie3_ctrl: pcie-ctrl@407c {
+ compatible = "syscon";
+ reg = <0x0000407c 0x4>;
+ };
+
serdes_ln_ctrl: serdes-ln-ctrl@4080 {
compatible = "mmio-mux";
reg = <0x00004080 0x50>;
@@ -576,6 +596,204 @@
};
};
+ pcie0_rc: pcie@2900000 {
+ compatible = "ti,j721e-pcie-host";
+ reg = <0x00 0x02900000 0x00 0x1000>,
+ <0x00 0x02907000 0x00 0x400>,
+ <0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x00800000>,
+ <0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x00001000>;
+ reg-names = "intd_cfg", "user_cfg", "reg", "cfg";
+ interrupt-names = "link_state";
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 318 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+ device_type = "pci";
+ ti,syscon-pcie-ctrl = <&pcie0_ctrl>;
+ max-link-speed = <3>;
+ num-lanes = <2>;
+ power-domains = <&k3_pds 239 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>;
+ clocks = <&k3_clks 239 1>;
+ clock-names = "fck";
+ #address-cells = <3>;
+ #size-cells = <2>;
+ bus-range = <0x0 0xf>;
+ vendor-id = <0x104c>;
+ device-id = <0xb00d>;
+ msi-map = <0x0 &gic_its 0x0 0x10000>;
+ dma-coherent;
+ ranges = <0x01000000 0x0 0x10001000 0x0 0x10001000 0x0
0x0010000>,
+ <0x02000000 0x0 0x10011000 0x0 0x10011000 0x0
0x7fef000>;
+ dma-ranges = <0x02000000 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x10000 0x0>;
+ };
+
+ pcie0_ep: pcie-ep@2900000 {
Not related to this patch, but just a suggestion: pcie-ep -> do we
need to add that to the Generic names in DT spec?
[...]
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
index f787aa73aaae..eeb02115b966 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi
@@ -132,9 +132,12 @@
<0x00 0x06400000 0x00 0x06400000 0x00 0x00400000>, /*
USBSS1 */
<0x00 0x01000000 0x00 0x01000000 0x00 0x0af02400>, /*
Most peripherals */
<0x00 0x30000000 0x00 0x30000000 0x00 0x0c400000>, /*
MAIN NAVSS */
- <0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x01000000>, /*
PCIe Core*/
+ <0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x0d000000 0x00 0x01800000>, /*
PCIe Core*/
+ <0x00 0x0e000000 0x00 0x0e000000 0x00 0x01800000>, /*
PCIe Core*/
<0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x10000000>, /*
PCIe DAT */
^^
should
be PCIe1?
Just because you are introducing PCIe2,3 in this patch, the net result
does'nt look consistent? Also might want to cover this change in the
$commit_message.
yeah, we could have a separate patch for this change.
Thanks
Kishon
[...]
<0x00 0x64800000 0x00 0x64800000 0x00 0x00800000>, /*
C71 */
+ <0x44 0x00000000 0x44 0x00000000 0x00 0x08000000>, /*
PCIe2 DAT */
+ <0x44 0x10000000 0x44 0x10000000 0x00 0x08000000>, /*
PCIe3 DAT */
<0x4d 0x80800000 0x4d 0x80800000 0x00 0x00800000>, /*
C66_0 */
<0x4d 0x81800000 0x4d 0x81800000 0x00 0x00800000>, /*
C66_1 */
<0x4e 0x20000000 0x4e 0x20000000 0x00 0x00080000>, /*
GPU */
--
2.17.1
