From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9392DC433F5 for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 756E061263 for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242826AbhIQOeb (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:34:31 -0400 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.197]:39225 "EHLO relay5-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241700AbhIQOea (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Sep 2021 10:34:30 -0400 Received: (Authenticated sender: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F001F1C0002; Fri, 17 Sep 2021 14:33:05 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:33:05 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Nicolas Ferre Cc: kavyasree.kotagiri@microchip.com, ludovic.desroches@microchip.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Manohar.Puri@microchip.com, Madhuri.Sripada@microchip.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: at91: add basic support for new SoC lan966x Message-ID: References: <20210831102138.2476-1-kavyasree.kotagiri@microchip.com> <8610dd7a-a6eb-0c65-f66e-b4f9fdbce854@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8610dd7a-a6eb-0c65-f66e-b4f9fdbce854@microchip.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, I wanted to reply earlier but I still have a few comments... On 17/09/2021 15:41:01+0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > On 31/08/2021 at 12:21, kavyasree.kotagiri@microchip.com wrote: > > From: Kavyasree Kotagiri > > > > This patch introduces Microchip LAN966X ARMv7 based SoC family > > of multiport gigabit AVB/TSN-capable ethernet switches. > > It supports two SKUs: 4-port LAN9662 with multiprotocol > > processing support and 8-port LAN9668 switch. > > > > LAN966X includes copper and serial ethernet interfaces, > > peripheral interfaces such as PCIe, USB, TWI, SPI, UART, QSPI, > > SD/eMMC, Parallel Interface (PI) as well as synchronization > > and trigger inputs/outputs. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kavya Sree Kotagiri > > Your name fixed with your permission and as Rob suggested in a previous > series. > > > --- > > v1 -> v2: > > - Removed lan966x_dt_device_init(). > > System boots fine without this function. > > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig | 13 +++++++++++++ > > arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile | 1 + > > Kconfig and Makefile files updated to avoid merge conflict with SAMA7G5 that > was integrated in 5.15-rc1. > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/lan966x.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-at91/lan966x.c > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig > > index ccd7e80ce943..06cb425af761 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig > > @@ -122,6 +122,14 @@ config SOC_SAM9X60 > > help > > Select this if you are using Microchip's SAM9X60 SoC > > +config SOC_LAN966X > > + bool "ARMv7 based Microchip LAN966X SoC family" > > + depends on ARCH_MULTI_V7 > > + select SOC_LAN966 > > + select DW_APB_TIMER_OF > > + help > > + This enables support for ARMv7 based Microchip LAN966X SoC family. > > + I don't think SOC_LAN966X is a good name or said differently as it is not part specific, I don't get why this isn't merged with SOC_LAN966. I would have one or the other. > > comment "Clocksource driver selection" > > config ATMEL_CLOCKSOURCE_PIT > > @@ -188,6 +196,11 @@ config SOC_SAMA5 > > select SOC_SAM_V7 > > select SRAM if PM > > +config SOC_LAN966 > > + bool > > + select ARM_GIC > > + select MEMORY > > + > > config ATMEL_PM > > bool > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile > > index f565490f1b70..93cfd5b4e6d4 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile > > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ > > # CPU-specific support > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_AT91RM9200) += at91rm9200.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_AT91SAM9) += at91sam9.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_LAN966X) += lan966x.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAM9X60) += sam9x60.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMA5) += sama5.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_SAMV7) += samv7.o > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/lan966x.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/lan966x.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..154d616569ae > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/lan966x.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later > > +/* > > + * Setup code for LAN966X > > + * > > + * Copyright (C) 2021 Microchip Technology, Inc. and its subsidiaries > > + * > > + */ > > + > > +#include > > +#include > > + > > +#include > > +#include > > + I'm not sure all those include are actually used. > > +#include "generic.h" > > + > > +static const char *const lan966x_dt_board_compat[] __initconst = { > > + "microchip,lan966x", > > This compatibility string will need to be documented in > Documentation/arm/microchip.rst > and > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-at91.yaml (or a similar file, as > you wish). > > You'll add it to your DT patches. > Yes and you'll have to document lan9662 and lan9668. Really, wildcards in the compatible strings are usually not a good idea. > > + NULL > > +}; > > + > > +DT_MACHINE_START(lan966x_dt, "Microchip LAN966X") > > + /* Maintainer: Microchip */ > > + .dt_compat = lan966x_dt_board_compat, > > +MACHINE_END > > > > All the rest looks good to me: no need to resend. It's queued in at91-soc > branch targeting 5.16. > You'll see it appearing in linux-next in the next few days. > Well, I'm still wondering one thing, is arch/arm/mach-at91/lan966x.c necessary at all to boot the platform? -- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com