Re: [PATCH v9 2/4] arm64: dts: qcom: iq9: Introduce new memory map for qcs9100/qcs9075

[Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 09/06/2025 12:54, Wasim Nazir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 11:22:39PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 02:02:50PM +0530, Wasim Nazir wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 09:54:38PM +0530, Wasim Nazir wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 04:21:46PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 03:05:55PM +0530, Wasim Nazir wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 10:41:39AM -0500, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 02:58:45PM +0530, Wasim Nazir wrote:
>>>>>>>> From: Pratyush Brahma <quic_pbrahma@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> SA8775P has a memory map which caters to the auto specific requirements.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought SA8775P was the IoT platform and SA8255P was the automotive
>>>>>>> one. Has this changed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both SA8775P & SA8255P is for auto but former one is non-SCMI based while
>>>>>> the later one is SCMI based chip.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only IQ9 series of chips (QCS9100 & QCS9075) are for IOT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> QCS9100 & QCS9075 are its IOT variants (with marketing name as IQ9) which
>>>>>>>> inherit the memory map of SA8775P require a slightly different memory
>>>>>>>> map as compared to SA8775P auto parts.
>>>>>>>> This new memory map is applicable for all the IoT boards which inherit
>>>>>>>> the initial SA8775P memory map. This is not applicable for non-IoT
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there are platform out there that actually uses the "initial SA8775P
>>>>>>> memory map"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes currently sa8775p-ride and sa8775p-ride-r3 are using initial memory
>>>>>> map.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> boards.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some new carveouts (viz. gunyah_md and a few pil dtb carveouts) have been
>>>>>>>> introduced as part of firmware updates for IoT. The size and base address
>>>>>>>> have been updated for video PIL carveout compared to SA8775P since it is
>>>>>>>> being brought up for the first time on IoT boards. The base addresses
>>>>>>>> of the rest of the PIL carveouts have been updated to accommodate the
>>>>>>>> change in size of video since PIL regions are relocatable and their
>>>>>>>> functionality is not impacted due to this change. The size of camera
>>>>>>>> pil has also been increased without breaking any feature.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The size of trusted apps carveout has also been reduced since it is
>>>>>>>> sufficient to meet IoT requirements. Also, audio_mdf_mem & tz_ffi_mem
>>>>>>>> carveout and its corresponding scm reference has been removed as these
>>>>>>>> are not required for IoT parts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Incorporate these changes in the updated memory map.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Brahma <quic_pbrahma@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Prakash Gupta <quic_guptap@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Wasim Nazir <quic_wasimn@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>   .../boot/dts/qcom/iq9-reserved-memory.dtsi    | 113 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>   1 file changed, 113 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/iq9-reserved-memory.dtsi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/iq9-reserved-memory.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/iq9-reserved-memory.dtsi
>>>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>>>> index 000000000000..ff2600eb5e3d
>>>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/iq9-reserved-memory.dtsi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The naming convention is <soc>-<something>.dtsi and I don't see any
>>>>>>> other uses of the "iq9" naming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As this new memory map is common for IQ9 series of SoC (QCS9100 &
>>>>>> QCS9075), so we have used its common name.
>>>>>
>>>>> IQ9 name is not known or visible outside of this commit.
>>>>
>>>> Are you referring to add the same in cover-letter?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Once the DT structure for QCS9100 is refactored, we would update this
>>>>>> common file there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you refactor it first?
>>>>
>>>> This refactoring involves changes in all the ride/ride-r3 boards which
>>>> are based on sa8775p & qcs9100. Even though we had sent v0[1] but we still
>>>> need to conclude on the final structure. Since, ethernet is broken in upstream,
>>>> we are working on its fix before sending another series.
>>>>
>>>> Hence, we want to proceed for iq9075-evk for now and once qcs9100 is
>>>> finalized, we can use the memory-map there.
>>>>
>>>> But to avoid this dependency and to proceed with iq9075-evk alone,
>>>> I can rename it to qcs9075-reserved-memory.dtsi.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know if that works here.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250507065116.353114-1-quic_wasimn@quicinc.com/
>>>
>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>
>>> Shall I proceed with qcs9075-reserved-memory.dtsi or do you have any
>>> other suggestion that we should discuss?
>>>
>>> Aparently, this series is for qcs9075 only so using exact (not common)
>>> name also aligns the naming format.
>>
>> Squash it into qcs9075.dtsi.
> 
> We don't have qcs9075.dtsi.
> Is it ok to squash it into qcs9075-som.dtsi ?

Is the memory map specific to SoM or to the SoC?

> 
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> With best wishes
>>>>> Dmitry
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Wasim
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Regards,
>>> Wasim
>>
>> -- 
>> With best wishes
>> Dmitry
> 


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry