[PATCH v1 0/5] Convert recently merged T30 boards to use DM PMIC
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC board: transformer-t30: convert ASUS Transformers to use DM PMIC board: grouper: convert ASUS Google Nexus 7 (2012) to use DM PMIC ARM: dts: tegra30: enable USB PHY node on some devices
arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 17 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 15 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 9 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 8 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 9 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +------------- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +------- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 +---------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 + configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 + 29 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 450 deletions(-)
Since required drivers were merged, we can safely clean up the board and switch to DM based driver with device tree support.
Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com --- arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 1 + board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 ++------------------------------- configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 ++ 4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi index 6e52fc5a53..aa207a70c7 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi @@ -110,6 +110,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_ddr_rx"; regulator-min-microvolt = <2850000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <2850000>; + regulator-boot-on; }; }; }; diff --git a/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c b/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c index 864f2de45f..00f79dd1db 100644 --- a/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c +++ b/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> +#include <asm/arch/tegra.h> #include <asm/arch-tegra/tegra_i2c.h> #include <linux/delay.h>
diff --git a/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c b/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c index a08e00dd87..2eaf16ded4 100644 --- a/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c +++ b/board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c @@ -7,60 +7,14 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> #include <dm.h> #include <fdt_support.h> -#include <i2c.h> -#include <log.h> #include <asm/arch/pinmux.h> #include <asm/arch/clock.h> -#include <asm/arch/gpio.h> -#include <asm/arch/tegra.h> #include <asm/arch-tegra/fuse.h> -#include <asm/gpio.h> -#include <linux/delay.h> -#include "pinmux-config-x3.h" - -#define MAX77663_I2C_ADDR 0x1C - -#define MAX77663_REG_SD2 0x18 -#define MAX77663_REG_LDO2 0x27 -#define MAX77663_REG_LDO3 0x29 -#define MAX77663_REG_LDO5 0x2D -#define MAX77663_REG_ONOFF_CFG1 0x41 -#define ONOFF_PWR_OFF BIT(1) - -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF -int do_poweroff(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, - int argc, char *const argv[]) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - uchar data_buffer[1]; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, MAX77663_I2C_ADDR, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return 0; - } - - ret = dm_i2c_read(dev, MAX77663_REG_ONOFF_CFG1, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; +#include <power/regulator.h>
- data_buffer[0] |= ONOFF_PWR_OFF; - - ret = dm_i2c_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_ONOFF_CFG1, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - /* wait some time and then print error */ - mdelay(5000); - - printf("Failed to power off!!!\n"); - return 1; -} -#endif +#include "pinmux-config-x3.h"
/* * Routine: pinmux_init @@ -82,52 +36,11 @@ void pinmux_init(void) #endif }
-#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_TEGRA -static void max77663_voltage_init(void) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, MAX77663_I2C_ADDR, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return; - } - - /* 0x60 for 1.8v, bit7:0 = voltage */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_SD2, 0x60); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_1v8_vio set failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* 0xF2 for 3.30v, enabled: bit7:6 = 11 = enable, bit5:0 = voltage */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_LDO2, 0xF2); - if (ret) - log_debug("avdd_usb set failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* 0xEC for 3.00v, enabled: bit7:6 = 11 = enable, bit5:0 = voltage */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_LDO3, 0xEC); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_usd set failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* 0xE9 for 2.85v, enabled: bit7:6 = 11 = enable, bit5:0 = voltage */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_LDO5, 0xE9); - if (ret) - log_debug("vcore_emmc set failed: %d\n", ret); -} - -/* - * Routine: pin_mux_mmc - * Description: setup the MMC muxes, power rails, etc. - */ -void pin_mux_mmc(void) -{ - /* Bring up uSD and eMMC power */ - max77663_voltage_init(); -} -#endif /* MMC */ - int nvidia_board_init(void) { + /* Set up boot-on regulators */ + regulators_enable_boot_on(true); + /* Set up panel bridge clocks */ clock_start_periph_pll(PERIPH_ID_EXTPERIPH3, CLOCK_ID_PERIPH, 24 * 1000000); diff --git a/configs/x3_t30_defconfig b/configs/x3_t30_defconfig index a151f58524..90cbc2078a 100644 --- a/configs/x3_t30_defconfig +++ b/configs/x3_t30_defconfig @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_USB_MASS_STORAGE=y CONFIG_CMD_UMS_ABORT_KEYED=y # CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set CONFIG_CMD_PAUSE=y +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y CONFIG_CMD_EXT4_WRITE=y # CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set # CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set @@ -64,11 +65,14 @@ CONFIG_FASTBOOT_CMD_OEM_FORMAT=y CONFIG_SYS_I2C_TEGRA=y CONFIG_BUTTON_KEYBOARD=y CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y +CONFIG_DM_PMIC_MAX77663=y CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_MAX77663=y CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA=y CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y CONFIG_TEGRA20_SLINK=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET_MAX77663=y CONFIG_USB=y CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=y CONFIG_USB_EHCI_TEGRA=y
Since required drivers were merged, we can safely clean up the board and switch to DM based driver with device tree support.
Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com --- arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 1 + board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +++----------------------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 ++ 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts index 5c7b2deae5..22320de708 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ regulator-name = "avdd_dsi_csi"; regulator-min-microvolt = <1200000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <1200000>; + regulator-boot-on; }; }; }; diff --git a/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c b/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c index 7921ff1a73..2525b50d3e 100644 --- a/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c +++ b/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> +#include <asm/arch/tegra.h> #include <asm/arch-tegra/tegra_i2c.h> #include <linux/delay.h>
diff --git a/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c b/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c index e1a0b242e2..6835b1ee70 100644 --- a/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c +++ b/board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c @@ -7,48 +7,12 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> #include <dm.h> #include <fdt_support.h> -#include <i2c.h> -#include <log.h> #include <asm/arch/pinmux.h> -#include <asm/arch/gp_padctrl.h> -#include <asm/arch/gpio.h> -#include <asm/gpio.h> -#include <linux/delay.h> -#include "pinmux-config-endeavoru.h" - -#define TPS80032_CTL1_I2C_ADDR 0x48 -#define TPS80032_PHOENIX_DEV_ON 0x25 -#define DEVOFF BIT(0) -#define TPS80032_LDO1_CFG_STATE 0x9E -#define TPS80032_LDO1_CFG_VOLTAGE 0x9F - -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF -int do_poweroff(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, - int argc, char *const argv[]) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, TPS80032_CTL1_I2C_ADDR, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return 0; - } +#include <power/regulator.h>
- ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS80032_PHOENIX_DEV_ON, DEVOFF); - if (ret) - return ret; - - // wait some time and then print error - mdelay(5000); - - printf("Failed to power off!!!\n"); - return 1; -} -#endif +#include "pinmux-config-endeavoru.h"
/* * Routine: pinmux_init @@ -60,37 +24,13 @@ void pinmux_init(void) ARRAY_SIZE(endeavoru_pinmux_common)); }
-#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_TEGRA -static void tps80032_voltage_init(void) +int nvidia_board_init(void) { - struct udevice *dev; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, TPS80032_CTL1_I2C_ADDR, 1, &dev); - if (ret) - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - - /* TPS80032: LDO1_REG = 1.2v to DSI */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS80032_LDO1_CFG_VOLTAGE, 0x03); - if (ret) - log_debug("avdd_dsi_csi voltage set failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* TPS80032: LDO1_REG enable */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS80032_LDO1_CFG_STATE, 0x01); - if (ret) - log_debug("avdd_dsi_csi enable failed: %d\n", ret); -} + /* Set up boot-on regulators */ + regulators_enable_boot_on(true);
-/* - * Routine: pin_mux_mmc - * Description: setup the MMC muxes, power rails, etc. - */ -void pin_mux_mmc(void) -{ - /* Bring up DSI power */ - tps80032_voltage_init(); + return 0; } -#endif /* MMC */
#if defined(CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT) && defined(CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP) int ft_board_setup(void *blob, struct bd_info *bd) diff --git a/configs/endeavoru_defconfig b/configs/endeavoru_defconfig index d605acdfc8..7212675546 100644 --- a/configs/endeavoru_defconfig +++ b/configs/endeavoru_defconfig @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_USB_MASS_STORAGE=y CONFIG_CMD_UMS_ABORT_KEYED=y # CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set CONFIG_CMD_PAUSE=y +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y CONFIG_CMD_EXT4_WRITE=y # CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set # CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set @@ -61,10 +62,13 @@ CONFIG_FASTBOOT_CMD_OEM_FORMAT=y CONFIG_SYS_I2C_TEGRA=y CONFIG_BUTTON_KEYBOARD=y CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y +CONFIG_DM_PMIC_TPS80031=y CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR=y CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_TPS80031=y CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA=y CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET_TPS80031=y CONFIG_USB=y CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=y CONFIG_USB_EHCI_TEGRA=y
Since required drivers were merged, we can safely clean up the board and switch to DM based driver with device tree support.
Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com --- arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 2 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 4 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 2 + board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +----------------- configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + 8 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 127 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts index 39f7caf8d0..d62d43268b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_emmc_core"; regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
/* uSD slot VDD */ @@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_usd"; regulator-min-microvolt = <3100000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <3100000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
/* uSD slot VDDIO */ diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts index fd9d11ca19..efc6a83b9d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts @@ -84,12 +84,14 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_1v2_backlight"; regulator-min-microvolt = <1200000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <1200000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
vcore_lcd: vdd2 { regulator-name = "vcore_lcd"; regulator-min-microvolt = <1500000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
vdd_1v8_vio: vddio { @@ -105,6 +107,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_emmc_core"; regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
/* uSD slot VDDIO */ @@ -119,6 +122,7 @@ regulator-name = "avdd_dsi_csi"; regulator-min-microvolt = <1200000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <1200000>; + regulator-boot-on; }; }; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi index 888f9ca74e..afddb83983 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi @@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_emmc_core"; regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
/* uSD slot VDD */ @@ -89,6 +90,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_usd"; regulator-min-microvolt = <3100000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <3100000>; + regulator-boot-on; };
/* uSD slot VDDIO */ diff --git a/board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig b/board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig index accc999c43..915436ba6c 100644 --- a/board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig +++ b/board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig @@ -9,14 +9,4 @@ config SYS_VENDOR config SYS_CONFIG_NAME default "transformer-t30"
-config TRANSFORMER_SPI_BOOT - bool "Enable support for SPI based flash" - select TEGRA20_SLINK - select DM_SPI_FLASH - select SPI_FLASH_WINBOND - help - Tegra 3 based Transformers with Windows RT have core - boot sequence (BCT and EBT) on separate SPI FLASH - memory with 4MB size. - endif diff --git a/board/asus/transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config b/board/asus/transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config index 18ab4fbd87..e40d0fdd47 100644 --- a/board/asus/transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config +++ b/board/asus/transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="tegra30-asus-tf600t" -CONFIG_TRANSFORMER_SPI_BOOT=y CONFIG_BOOTCOMMAND="setenv gpio_button 222; if run check_button; then poweroff; fi; setenv gpio_button 132; if run check_button; then echo Starting SPI flash update ...; run update_spi; fi; run bootcmd_usb0; run bootcmd_mmc1; run bootcmd_mmc0; poweroff;" +CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_WINBOND=y CONFIG_USB_GADGET_PRODUCT_NUM=0x4d00 diff --git a/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c b/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c index 89819b2b92..952e2c8224 100644 --- a/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c +++ b/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> +#include <asm/arch/tegra.h> #include <asm/arch-tegra/tegra_i2c.h> #include <linux/delay.h>
diff --git a/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c b/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c index ba795a802e..29d77146bb 100644 --- a/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c +++ b/board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c @@ -9,70 +9,13 @@
/* T30 Transformers derive from Cardhu board */
-#include <common.h> #include <dm.h> #include <fdt_support.h> -#include <i2c.h> -#include <log.h> #include <asm/arch/pinmux.h> #include <asm/arch/gp_padctrl.h> -#include <asm/arch/gpio.h> -#include <asm/gpio.h> -#include <linux/delay.h> -#include "pinmux-config-transformer.h" - -#define TPS65911_I2C_ADDRESS 0x2D - -#define TPS65911_VDD1 0x21 -#define TPS65911_VDD1_OP 0x22 -#define TPS65911_LDO1 0x30 -#define TPS65911_LDO2 0x31 -#define TPS65911_LDO3 0x37 -#define TPS65911_LDO5 0x32 -#define TPS65911_LDO6 0x35 - -#define TPS65911_DEVCTRL 0x3F -#define DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK BIT(7) -#define DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK BIT(2) -#define DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK BIT(0) - -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF -int do_poweroff(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, - int argc, char *const argv[]) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - uchar data_buffer[1]; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, TPS65911_I2C_ADDRESS, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return 0; - } +#include <power/regulator.h>
- ret = dm_i2c_read(dev, TPS65911_DEVCTRL, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - data_buffer[0] |= DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK; - - ret = dm_i2c_write(dev, TPS65911_DEVCTRL, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - data_buffer[0] |= DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK; - data_buffer[0] &= ~DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK; - - ret = dm_i2c_write(dev, TPS65911_DEVCTRL, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - // wait some time and then print error - mdelay(5000); - printf("Failed to power off!!!\n"); - return 1; -} -#endif +#include "pinmux-config-transformer.h"
/* * Routine: pinmux_init @@ -92,65 +35,13 @@ void pinmux_init(void) } }
-#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_TEGRA -static void tps65911_voltage_init(void) +int nvidia_board_init(void) { - struct udevice *dev; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, TPS65911_I2C_ADDRESS, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return; - } - - /* TPS659110: LDO1_REG = 3.3v, ACTIVE to SDMMC4 */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_LDO1, 0xc9); - if (ret) - log_debug("vcore_emmc set failed: %d\n", ret); - - if (of_machine_is_compatible("asus,tf600t")) { - /* TPS659110: VDD1_REG = 1.2v, ACTIVE to backlight */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_VDD1_OP, 0x33); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_bl set failed: %d\n", ret); - - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_VDD1, 0x0d); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_bl enable failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* TPS659110: LDO5_REG = 3.3v, ACTIVE to SDMMC1 VIO */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_LDO5, 0x65); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_usd set failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* TPS659110: LDO6_REG = 1.2v, ACTIVE to MIPI */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_LDO6, 0x11); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_mipi set failed: %d\n", ret); - } else { - /* TPS659110: LDO2_REG = 3.1v, ACTIVE to SDMMC1 */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_LDO2, 0xb9); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_usd set failed: %d\n", ret); + /* Set up boot-on regulators */ + regulators_enable_boot_on(true);
- /* TPS659110: LDO3_REG = 3.1v, ACTIVE to SDMMC1 VIO */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_LDO3, 0x5d); - if (ret) - log_debug("vddio_usd set failed: %d\n", ret); - } -} - -/* - * Routine: pin_mux_mmc - * Description: setup the MMC muxes, power rails, etc. - */ -void pin_mux_mmc(void) -{ - /* Bring up uSD and eMMC power */ - tps65911_voltage_init(); + return 0; } -#endif /* MMC */
#if defined(CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT) && defined(CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP) int ft_board_setup(void *blob, struct bd_info *bd) diff --git a/configs/transformer_t30_defconfig b/configs/transformer_t30_defconfig index 092c0aa2b0..8d828c1fa6 100644 --- a/configs/transformer_t30_defconfig +++ b/configs/transformer_t30_defconfig @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_USB_MASS_STORAGE=y CONFIG_CMD_UMS_ABORT_KEYED=y # CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set CONFIG_CMD_PAUSE=y +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y CONFIG_CMD_EXT4_WRITE=y # CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set # CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set @@ -65,10 +66,14 @@ CONFIG_I2C_MUX=y CONFIG_I2C_MUX_GPIO=y CONFIG_BUTTON_KEYBOARD=y CONFIG_DM_PMIC=y +CONFIG_DM_PMIC_TPS65910=y CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR=y CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_FIXED=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_TPS65911=y CONFIG_PWM_TEGRA=y CONFIG_SYS_NS16550=y +CONFIG_TEGRA20_SLINK=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET_TPS65910=y CONFIG_USB=y CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=y CONFIG_USB_EHCI_TEGRA=y
Since required drivers were merged, we can safely clean up the board and switch to DM based driver with device tree support.
Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com --- .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + 12 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 163 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts index 945ae404ac..bfc675ca92 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ regulator-name = "vcore_emmc"; regulator-min-microvolt = <2850000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <2850000>; + regulator-boot-on; }; }; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts index 4363bfc87d..cf03011bc1 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ regulator-name = "vdd_emmc_core"; regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>; + regulator-boot-on; }; }; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts index 89348fde13..ef8b2b5049 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ regulator-name = "vcore_emmc"; regulator-min-microvolt = <2850000>; regulator-max-microvolt = <2850000>; + regulator-boot-on; }; }; }; diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/Kconfig b/board/asus/grouper/Kconfig index 47d9bae946..f935cce422 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/Kconfig +++ b/board/asus/grouper/Kconfig @@ -9,12 +9,4 @@ config SYS_VENDOR config SYS_CONFIG_NAME default "grouper"
-config GROUPER_TPS65911 - bool "Enable support TI TPS65911 PMIC" - select CMD_POWEROFF - -config GROUPER_MAX77663 - bool "Enable support MAXIM MAX77663 PMIC" - select CMD_POWEROFF - endif diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/Makefile b/board/asus/grouper/Makefile index e4a477a366..d041cf8087 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/Makefile +++ b/board/asus/grouper/Makefile @@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ # Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com
ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD -obj-$(CONFIG_GROUPER_MAX77663) += grouper-spl-max.o -obj-$(CONFIG_GROUPER_TPS65911) += grouper-spl-ti.o +obj-$(CONFIG_DM_PMIC_MAX77663) += grouper-spl-max.o +obj-$(CONFIG_DM_PMIC_TPS65910) += grouper-spl-ti.o endif
obj-y += grouper.o diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config b/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config index 4d8d5263fa..265295c8b3 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config +++ b/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@ CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565" -CONFIG_GROUPER_MAX77663=y +CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF=y +# CONFIG_MAX77663_GPIO is not set +CONFIG_DM_PMIC_MAX77663=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_MAX77663=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET_MAX77663=y diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config b/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config index fc768b2051..a7ee3587ed 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config +++ b/board/asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@ CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269" -CONFIG_GROUPER_TPS65911=y +CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF=y +CONFIG_DM_PMIC_TPS65910=y +# CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_TPS65910 is not set +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_TPS65911=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET_TPS65910=y diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config b/board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config index 1fb0633e3a..d461b4752a 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config +++ b/board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ CONFIG_DEFAULT_DEVICE_TREE="tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565" -CONFIG_GROUPER_MAX77663=y CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT="Tegra30 (Tilapia) # " +CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF=y +# CONFIG_MAX77663_GPIO is not set +CONFIG_DM_PMIC_MAX77663=y +CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR_MAX77663=y +CONFIG_SYSRESET_MAX77663=y diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c b/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c index 844383766a..3e58bf97cc 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c +++ b/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> +#include <asm/arch/tegra.h> #include <asm/arch-tegra/tegra_i2c.h> #include <linux/delay.h>
diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c b/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c index e5b78f0121..1dcce80b48 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c +++ b/board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> +#include <asm/arch/tegra.h> #include <asm/arch-tegra/tegra_i2c.h> #include <linux/delay.h>
diff --git a/board/asus/grouper/grouper.c b/board/asus/grouper/grouper.c index 5398ec8b9f..839a95ae15 100644 --- a/board/asus/grouper/grouper.c +++ b/board/asus/grouper/grouper.c @@ -7,105 +7,13 @@ * Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com */
-#include <common.h> #include <dm.h> #include <fdt_support.h> -#include <i2c.h> -#include <log.h> #include <asm/arch/pinmux.h> #include <asm/arch/gp_padctrl.h> -#include <asm/arch/gpio.h> -#include <asm/gpio.h> -#include <linux/delay.h> -#include "pinmux-config-grouper.h" - -#define TPS65911_I2C_ADDRESS 0x2D - -#define TPS65911_REG_LDO1 0x30 -#define TPS65911_REG_DEVCTRL 0x3F -#define DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK BIT(7) -#define DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK BIT(2) -#define DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK BIT(0) - -#define MAX77663_I2C_ADDRESS 0x3C - -#define MAX77663_REG_SD2 0x18 -#define MAX77663_REG_LDO3 0x29 -#define MAX77663_REG_ONOFF_CFG1 0x41 -#define ONOFF_PWR_OFF BIT(1) - -#ifdef CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF -#ifdef CONFIG_GROUPER_TPS65911 -int do_poweroff(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, - int flag, int argc, char *const argv[]) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - uchar data_buffer[1]; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, TPS65911_I2C_ADDRESS, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return 0; - } - - ret = dm_i2c_read(dev, TPS65911_REG_DEVCTRL, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - data_buffer[0] |= DEVCTRL_PWR_OFF_MASK; - - ret = dm_i2c_write(dev, TPS65911_REG_DEVCTRL, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - data_buffer[0] |= DEVCTRL_DEV_OFF_MASK; - data_buffer[0] &= ~DEVCTRL_DEV_ON_MASK; - - ret = dm_i2c_write(dev, TPS65911_REG_DEVCTRL, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - // wait some time and then print error - mdelay(5000); - - printf("Failed to power off!!!\n"); - return 1; -} -#endif /* CONFIG_GROUPER_TPS65911 */ - -#ifdef CONFIG_GROUPER_MAX77663 -int do_poweroff(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, - int flag, int argc, char *const argv[]) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - uchar data_buffer[1]; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, MAX77663_I2C_ADDRESS, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return 0; - } - - ret = dm_i2c_read(dev, MAX77663_REG_ONOFF_CFG1, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - data_buffer[0] |= ONOFF_PWR_OFF; +#include <power/regulator.h>
- ret = dm_i2c_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_ONOFF_CFG1, data_buffer, 1); - if (ret) - return ret; - - // wait some time and then print error - mdelay(5000); - - printf("Failed to power off!!!\n"); - return 1; -} -#endif /* CONFIG_GROUPER_MAX77663 */ -#endif /* CONFIG_CMD_POWEROFF */ +#include "pinmux-config-grouper.h"
/* * Routine: pinmux_init @@ -120,63 +28,13 @@ void pinmux_init(void) ARRAY_SIZE(grouper_padctrl)); }
-#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_TEGRA -static void __maybe_unused tps65911_voltage_init(void) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, TPS65911_I2C_ADDRESS, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return; - } - - /* TPS659110: LDO1_REG = 3.3v, ACTIVE to SDMMC4 */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, TPS65911_REG_LDO1, 0xC9); - if (ret) - log_debug("vcore_emmc set failed: %d\n", ret); -} - -static void __maybe_unused max77663_voltage_init(void) -{ - struct udevice *dev; - int ret; - - ret = i2c_get_chip_for_busnum(0, MAX77663_I2C_ADDRESS, 1, &dev); - if (ret) { - log_debug("cannot find PMIC I2C chip\n"); - return; - } - - /* 0x60 for 1.8v, bit7:0 = voltage */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_SD2, 0x60); - if (ret) - log_debug("vdd_1v8_vio set failed: %d\n", ret); - - /* 0xEC for 3.00v, enabled: bit7:6 = 11 = enable, bit5:0 = voltage */ - ret = dm_i2c_reg_write(dev, MAX77663_REG_LDO3, 0xEC); - if (ret) - log_debug("vcore_emmc set failed: %d\n", ret); -} - -/* - * Routine: pin_mux_mmc - * Description: setup the MMC muxes, power rails, etc. - */ -void pin_mux_mmc(void) +int nvidia_board_init(void) { -#ifdef CONFIG_GROUPER_MAX77663 - /* Bring up eMMC power on MAX PMIC */ - max77663_voltage_init(); -#endif + /* Set up boot-on regulators */ + regulators_enable_boot_on(true);
-#ifdef CONFIG_GROUPER_TPS65911 - /* Bring up eMMC power on TI PMIC */ - tps65911_voltage_init(); -#endif + return 0; } -#endif /* MMC */
#if defined(CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT) && defined(CONFIG_OF_BOARD_SETUP) int ft_board_setup(void *blob, struct bd_info *bd) diff --git a/configs/grouper_common_defconfig b/configs/grouper_common_defconfig index 258d7b1139..616540f7d5 100644 --- a/configs/grouper_common_defconfig +++ b/configs/grouper_common_defconfig @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ CONFIG_CMD_USB_MASS_STORAGE=y CONFIG_CMD_UMS_ABORT_KEYED=y # CONFIG_CMD_SETEXPR is not set CONFIG_CMD_PAUSE=y +CONFIG_CMD_REGULATOR=y CONFIG_CMD_EXT4_WRITE=y # CONFIG_SPL_DOS_PARTITION is not set # CONFIG_SPL_EFI_PARTITION is not set
Enable USB PHY nodes on ASUS Transformers, Grouper, Enadevoru and LG X3. This is not mandatory since driver will use default values but preferable for new devices.
Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com --- arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 +++++++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 15 +++++++++++++++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 11 +++++++++++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 7 +++++++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 7 +++++++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 8 ++++++++ 6 files changed, 55 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi index fcf31e2dd0..c9277388c9 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi @@ -71,6 +71,13 @@ dr_mode = "otg"; };
+ usb-phy@7d000000 { + status = "okay"; + nvidia,hssync-start-delay = <0>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsfslew = <2>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsrslew = <2>; + }; + backlight: backlight { compatible = "pwm-backlight";
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts index d62d43268b..19de984d5f 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts @@ -150,17 +150,32 @@ dr_mode = "otg"; };
+ usb-phy@7d000000 { + status = "okay"; + nvidia,hssync-start-delay = <0>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsfslew = <2>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsrslew = <2>; + }; + /* Mini USB port */ usb2: usb@7d004000 { status = "okay"; nvidia,vbus-gpio = <&gpio TEGRA_GPIO(H, 7) GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; };
+ usb-phy@7d004000 { + status = "okay"; + }; + /* Dock's USB port */ usb3: usb@7d008000 { status = "okay"; };
+ usb-phy@7d008000 { + status = "okay"; + }; + /* PMIC has a built-in 32KHz oscillator which is used by PMC */ clk32k_in: clock-32k { compatible = "fixed-clock"; diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts index efc6a83b9d..3f11d33bc4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts @@ -165,11 +165,22 @@ dr_mode = "otg"; };
+ usb-phy@7d000000 { + status = "okay"; + nvidia,hssync-start-delay = <0>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsfslew = <2>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsrslew = <2>; + }; + /* Dock's USB port */ usb3: usb@7d008000 { status = "okay"; };
+ usb-phy@7d008000 { + status = "okay"; + }; + backlight: backlight { compatible = "pwm-backlight";
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi index afddb83983..c4649eee79 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi @@ -131,6 +131,13 @@ dr_mode = "otg"; };
+ usb-phy@7d000000 { + status = "okay"; + nvidia,hssync-start-delay = <0>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsfslew = <2>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsrslew = <2>; + }; + /* Dock's USB port */ usb3: usb@7d008000 { status = "okay"; diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts index 22320de708..21cd0f9207 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts @@ -101,6 +101,13 @@ dr_mode = "otg"; };
+ usb-phy@7d000000 { + status = "okay"; + nvidia,hssync-start-delay = <0>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsfslew = <2>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsrslew = <2>; + }; + backlight: backlight { compatible = "nvidia,tegra-pwm-backlight";
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi index aa207a70c7..01936b872e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi @@ -153,6 +153,14 @@ dr_mode = "otg"; };
+ usb-phy@7d000000 { + status = "okay"; + nvidia,hssync-start-delay = <0>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsfslew = <2>; + nvidia,xcvr-lsrslew = <2>; + vbus-supply = <&avdd_3v3_periph>; + }; + /* PMIC has a built-in 32KHz oscillator which is used by PMC */ clk32k_in: clock-32k { compatible = "fixed-clock";
Hi Svyatoslav,
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
board: transformer-t30: convert ASUS Transformers to use DM PMIC board: grouper: convert ASUS Google Nexus 7 (2012) to use DM PMIC ARM: dts: tegra30: enable USB PHY node on some devices
arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 17 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 15 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 9 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 8 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 9 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +------------- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +------- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 +---------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 + configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 + 29 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 450 deletions(-)
-- 2.40.1
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
Hi Svyatoslav,
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
board: transformer-t30: convert ASUS Transformers to use DM PMIC board: grouper: convert ASUS Google Nexus 7 (2012) to use DM PMIC ARM: dts: tegra30: enable USB PHY node on some devices
arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 17 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 15 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 9 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 8 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 9 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +------------- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +------- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 +---------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 + configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 + 29 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 450 deletions(-)
-- 2.40.1
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
Hi Svyatoslav,
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
board: transformer-t30: convert ASUS Transformers to use DM PMIC board: grouper: convert ASUS Google Nexus 7 (2012) to use DM PMIC ARM: dts: tegra30: enable USB PHY node on some devices
arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 17 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 15 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 9 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 8 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 9 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +------------- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +------- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 +---------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 + configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 + 29 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 450 deletions(-)
-- 2.40.1
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
Hi Svyatoslav,
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
board: transformer-t30: convert ASUS Transformers to use DM PMIC board: grouper: convert ASUS Google Nexus 7 (2012) to use DM PMIC ARM: dts: tegra30: enable USB PHY node on some devices
arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 17 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 15 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 9 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 8 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 9 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +------------- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +------- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 +---------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 + configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 + 29 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 450 deletions(-)
-- 2.40.1
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
Hi Svyatoslav,
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
board: transformer-t30: convert ASUS Transformers to use DM PMIC board: grouper: convert ASUS Google Nexus 7 (2012) to use DM PMIC ARM: dts: tegra30: enable USB PHY node on some devices
arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-grouper-common.dtsi | 7 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-E1565.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-grouper-PM269.dts | 1 + .../dts/tegra30-asus-nexus7-tilapia-E1565.dts | 1 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-p1801-t.dts | 17 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-tf600t.dts | 15 ++ arch/arm/dts/tegra30-asus-transformer.dtsi | 9 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-htc-endeavoru.dts | 8 + arch/arm/dts/tegra30-lg-x3.dtsi | 9 + board/asus/grouper/Kconfig | 8 - board/asus/grouper/Makefile | 4 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_E1565.config | 6 +- .../asus/grouper/configs/grouper_PM269.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/configs/tilapia.config | 6 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-max.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper-spl-ti.c | 2 +- board/asus/grouper/grouper.c | 154 +----------------- board/asus/transformer-t30/Kconfig | 10 -- .../transformer-t30/configs/tf600t.config | 2 +- .../transformer-t30/transformer-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/asus/transformer-t30/transformer-t30.c | 121 +------------- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru-spl.c | 2 +- board/htc/endeavoru/endeavoru.c | 72 +------- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30-spl.c | 2 +- board/lg/x3-t30/x3-t30.c | 97 +---------- configs/endeavoru_defconfig | 4 + configs/grouper_common_defconfig | 1 + configs/transformer_t30_defconfig | 5 + configs/x3_t30_defconfig | 4 + 29 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 450 deletions(-)
-- 2.40.1
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
Hi Svyatoslav,
Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks.
Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
> Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
I don't believe I've seen upstream Tegra maintainers being actively hostile towards updates for older devices, I know they have certainly defocused them, but I'm not sure that's what I'd consider hostile.
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:52:22PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > .dts files in the upstream kernel? >
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
I don't believe I've seen upstream Tegra maintainers being actively hostile towards updates for older devices, I know they have certainly defocused them, but I'm not sure that's what I'd consider hostile.
No objections from me on upstreaming older devices in Linux. I used to be able to test most of the older devices, but many of which I used to have direct access to are now defunct (for varying reasons). So I will have to rely on the community for testing etc. since I cannot scale to the point where I personally have all of these devices.
Now, I don't think that's hostile and if I ever came across as hostile I'm sorry. The intent was never to reject device support. Obviously the Linux kernel has high standards and sometimes that can be off-putting, but I don't think we've ever asked for anything out of the ordinary.
Thierry
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
Hi Svyatoslav,
> Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC
Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their .dts files in the upstream kernel?
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
Thierry
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 04:51:08PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > .dts files in the upstream kernel? >
Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
So, the issue with U-Boot and kernel device trees being out of sync is that we then can't support the model of "just pass the current DT to the OS". This in general is good to support because it means that even if a given platform isn't formally SystemReady IR certified it's still likely to be functional.
The most strict rule is that you can't have bindings in U-Boot that conflict with the kernel, or should be in the kernel but aren't, and so on.
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 04:51:08PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote: > > пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > > > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > > .dts files in the upstream kernel? > > > > Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as > existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with > linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or > lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
So, the issue with U-Boot and kernel device trees being out of sync is that we then can't support the model of "just pass the current DT to the OS". This in general is good to support because it means that even if a given platform isn't formally SystemReady IR certified it's still likely to be functional.
This is certainly not something that we ever strived for with Tegra. It was always very clear that we needed to get the DTB from the same source as the kernel. The vast majority of what's in the DTB is completely useless for U-Boot because it simply doesn't support (and doesn't have to support) a lot of the hardware that Linux supports.
One concern that I have with this policy is that for certain devices we may just not be able to do this. Especially with some early OEM devices I recall that they had limited storage for the bootloader. Since the DTB needs to be embedded, a full-blown DTB from Linux might inflate the size significantly. Comparing to what we have today, the Linux DTB can be anywhere from 2 to 3 times as big as the U-Boot DTB.
The most strict rule is that you can't have bindings in U-Boot that conflict with the kernel, or should be in the kernel but aren't, and so on.
I think this makes sense.
Thierry
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 12:55:32PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 04:51:08PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote: > > > > пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > > > > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > > > > > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > > > > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > > > .dts files in the upstream kernel? > > > > > > > Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as > > existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with > > linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or > > lg_x3. > > The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review > in the kernel first. >
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
So, the issue with U-Boot and kernel device trees being out of sync is that we then can't support the model of "just pass the current DT to the OS". This in general is good to support because it means that even if a given platform isn't formally SystemReady IR certified it's still likely to be functional.
This is certainly not something that we ever strived for with Tegra. It was always very clear that we needed to get the DTB from the same source as the kernel. The vast majority of what's in the DTB is completely useless for U-Boot because it simply doesn't support (and doesn't have to support) a lot of the hardware that Linux supports.
One concern that I have with this policy is that for certain devices we may just not be able to do this. Especially with some early OEM devices I recall that they had limited storage for the bootloader. Since the DTB needs to be embedded, a full-blown DTB from Linux might inflate the size significantly. Comparing to what we have today, the Linux DTB can be anywhere from 2 to 3 times as big as the U-Boot DTB.
As I noted in a different thread, I will be unhappy if U-Boot is unable to still be useful on a platform (tbs2910) that has just shy of 384kB of space for the binary, so still being somewhat small is a feature I want us to keep.
That said, most of the common community distributions want to be able to not ship device trees at least some day. At least one today requires being passed the right / valid device tree. And U-Boot will pass along the tree we're using if no override is presented. So yes, passing along the full real device tree to U-Boot and then being able to pass it further along is generally desired. If you can't you can't. If you want to take on the headache of keeping them separate, well, OK. But as this series shows we also make use of more of the tree than we used to as well, so just doing the drop-in and occasional resync is good.
15 листопада 2023 р. 21:11:49 GMT+02:00, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com написав(-ла):
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 04:51:08PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote: > > пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > > > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > > .dts files in the upstream kernel? > > > > Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as > existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with > linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or > lg_x3.
The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review in the kernel first.
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
So, the issue with U-Boot and kernel device trees being out of sync is that we then can't support the model of "just pass the current DT to the OS". This in general is good to support because it means that even if a given platform isn't formally SystemReady IR certified it's still likely to be functional.
The most strict rule is that you can't have bindings in U-Boot that conflict with the kernel, or should be in the kernel but aren't, and so on.
So you say that U-Boot should support only components which have linux driver? May you clarify?
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 11:42:45AM +0200, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:
15 листопада 2023 р. 21:11:49 GMT+02:00, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com написав(-ла):
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 04:51:08PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote:
пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote: > > > > пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > > > > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > > > > > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > > > > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > > > .dts files in the upstream kernel? > > > > > > > Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as > > existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with > > linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or > > lg_x3. > > The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review > in the kernel first. >
May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
So, the issue with U-Boot and kernel device trees being out of sync is that we then can't support the model of "just pass the current DT to the OS". This in general is good to support because it means that even if a given platform isn't formally SystemReady IR certified it's still likely to be functional.
The most strict rule is that you can't have bindings in U-Boot that conflict with the kernel, or should be in the kernel but aren't, and so on.
So you say that U-Boot should support only components which have linux driver? May you clarify?
I think Tom is referring specifically to the bindings only. While it's certainly preferable to have drivers in Linux for all bindings, that's never been a strict requirement.
Thierry
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 12:44:34PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 11:42:45AM +0200, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:
15 листопада 2023 р. 21:11:49 GMT+02:00, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com написав(-ла):
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 04:51:08PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:04:07PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 02:11:16PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 1:28 PM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote: > > пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 15:13 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 11:58 AM Svyatoslav Ryhel clamor95@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > пн, 6 лист. 2023 р. о 13:46 Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com пише: > > > > > > > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > > > > > > > Since the proposed PMIC patches have been accepted, I see the need > > > > > to convert boards which I maintain to use DM drivers instead of board hacks. > > > > > > > > > > Svyatoslav Ryhel (5): > > > > > board: lg-x3: convert LG Optimus 4X and Vu to use DM PMIC > > > > > board: endeavoru: convert HTC One X to use DM PMIC > > > > > > > > Is there a reason why the two above devices don't appear to have their > > > > .dts files in the upstream kernel? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, there is a reason. Linux maintainers treat submitters as > > > existential enemies or as dirt at least. I was trying to work with > > > linux but I have no desire to spend any time to upstream endeavoru or > > > lg_x3. > > > > The usual policy for acceptance into U-Boot is to have upstream review > > in the kernel first. > > > > May you point to a policy which clearly and explicitly states this as > a mandatory condition?
There have been a number of devices rejected in the past until their DT are upstream but I'll leave Tom, who I've explicitly added on cc:, to clarify the exact policy.
Well, here is where it's tricky. I brought this up for one of the Broadcom MIPS platforms a week or two back, and Linus Walleij's point (and I'm paraphrasing) is there's not really an upstream for it to go.
What we cannot have is device tree bindings[1] that aren't upstream or worse yet conflict with the official bindings.
So the general way to resolve that is have device tree file be drop-in from the linux kernel, and what additions we must have be done via -u-boot.dtsi files. And in turn, some SoCs are better about keeping in sync with the kernel than other SoCs are.
Now, upstream being actively hostile to dts files, especially for older platforms? That's unfortunate. So long as we aren't violating the rules about bindings, the intention is that we don't have device trees that are either (a) massively out of sync with the kernel[2] or (b) kept intentionally mismatched from the kernel.
-- Tom
[1]: There are both examples like binman that Simon is working on at least but this is more exception than intentional rule. [2]: Per our other conversions, I know the tegra ones are in this unfortunate state in general
On the Tegra side we've been fairly lax about the device trees in U-Boot, I suppose. The assumption had always been that U-Boot would load an external DTB and pass it to the kernel on boot, so keeping them both in sync was never a high priority.
U-Boot does only a very tiny amount of what Linux does, so dropping in the kernel DTB always seemed a bit overkill.
In either case, if this is problematic, it's something that I could take a look at. Again, it's expected that the device trees are different, for historical reasons, but I'd be surprised if they actually conflict with one another. U-Boot's DTB was always supposed to be a subset of the Linux DTB.
So, the issue with U-Boot and kernel device trees being out of sync is that we then can't support the model of "just pass the current DT to the OS". This in general is good to support because it means that even if a given platform isn't formally SystemReady IR certified it's still likely to be functional.
The most strict rule is that you can't have bindings in U-Boot that conflict with the kernel, or should be in the kernel but aren't, and so on.
So you say that U-Boot should support only components which have linux driver? May you clarify?
I think Tom is referring specifically to the bindings only. While it's certainly preferable to have drivers in Linux for all bindings, that's never been a strict requirement.
All bindings must be upstreamed and we've been working with Rob (and he's been receptive) on this point. There's U-Boot specific bindings, even, now and those in turn pass validation in the kernel and can be synced in here. Can you give an example of what you're concerned about Svyatoslav?
participants (4)
-
Peter Robinson -
Svyatoslav Ryhel -
Thierry Reding -
Tom Rini