Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] ARM: dts: aspeed: Add NVIDIA GB200 UT3.0b board

[Donald Shannon <donalds@nvidia.com>]

On 9/2/25 22:46, Andrew Jeffery wrote:

> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> Hi Donald,
>
> Sorry for the delay.
>
> On Fri, 2025-08-15 at 15:43 -0700, Donald Shannon wrote:
>> This is an Aspeed AST2600 based unit testing platform for GB200.
>> UT3.0b is different than nvidia-gb200nvl-bmc due to networking topology
>> differences, additional gpio expanders, and voltage regulator gating
>> some devices.
>>
>> Reference to Ast2600 SOC [1].
>> Reference to Blackwell GB200NVL Platform [2].
>>
>> Link: https://www.aspeedtech.com/server_ast2600/ [1]
>> Link: https://nvdam.widen.net/s/wwnsxrhm2w/blackwell-datasheet-3384703 [2]
>> Signed-off-by: Donald Shannon <donalds@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/Makefile             |    1 +
>>   .../aspeed/aspeed-bmc-nvidia-gb200-ut30b.dts  | 1030 +++++++++++++++++
>>   2 files changed, 1031 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-nvidia-gb200-ut30b.dts
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/Makefile
>> index aba7451ab749..37edc4625a9f 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/Makefile
>>
> *snip*
>
>> +&gpio0 {
>> +       gpio-line-names =
>> +               /*A0-A7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*B0-B7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*C0-C7*/ "SGPIO_I2C_MUX_SEL-O", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*D0-D7*/ "", "", "", "UART1_MUX_SEL-O", "", "FPGA_PEX_RST_L-O", "", "",
>> +               /*E0-E7*/ "RTL8221_PHY_RST_L-O", "RTL8211_PHY_INT_L-I", "", "UART3_MUX_SEL-O",
>> +                                       "", "", "", "SGPIO_BMC_EN-O",
>> +               /*F0-F7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*G0-G7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*H0-H7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*I0-I7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "QSPI2_RST_L-O", "GLOBAL_WP_BMC-O", "BMC_DDR4_TEN-O",
>> +               /*J0-J7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*K0-K7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*L0-L7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*M0-M7*/ "PCIE_EP_RST_EN-O", "BMC_FRU_WP-O", "FPGA_RST_L-O", "STBY_POWER_EN-O",
>> +                                       "STBY_POWER_PG-I", "PCIE_EP_RST_L-O", "", "",
>> +               /*N0-N7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*O0-O7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*P0-P7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*Q0-Q7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*R0-R7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*S0-S7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*T0-T7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*U0-U7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*V0-V7*/ "AP_EROT_REQ-O", "EROT_AP_GNT-I", "", "","PCB_TEMP_ALERT-I", "","", "",
>> +               /*W0-W7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*X0-X7*/ "", "", "TPM_MUX_SEL-O", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*Y0-Y7*/ "", "", "", "EMMC_RST-O", "","", "", "",
>> +               /*Z0-Z7*/ "BMC_READY-O","", "", "", "", "", "", "";
>> +};
>> +
>> +&gpio1 {
>> +       /* 36 1.8V GPIOs */
>> +       gpio-line-names =
>> +               /*A0-A7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*B0-B7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "IO_EXPANDER_INT_L-I","",
>> +               /*C0-C7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",
>> +               /*D0-D7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "SPI_HOST_TPM_RST_L-O", "SPI_BMC_FPGA_INT_L-I",
>> +               /*E0-E7*/ "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "";
>> +};
>> +
>> +&sgpiom0 {
> So the style guide asks the referenced nodes to be ordered either
> alphabetically, or in DTSI order[1] (which should be unit-address
> order).
>
> [1]: https://docs.kernel.org/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-style.html#order-of-nodes
>
> What we have to the quoted section above isn't in alphabetical order.
> To this point it was DTSI order, but that breaks here too.
>
> My preference is that nodes in the DTS referencing the DTSI are
> alphabetical (as we can't see the unit address for ordering). Can you
> please fix it?
>
> You mention in your cover letter that ordering was addressed in v3 -
> did we lose that along the way?
>
> *snip*
>
>> +
>> +&uart_routing { };
> Drop this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrew

Hi Andrew,

Thank you. I will switch to alphabetical order and remove uart_routing.

Thanks,

Don