Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: serial: add documentation for the SiFive UART driver

From: Paul Walmsley
Date: Fri Oct 19 2018 - 18:06:07 EST



On 10/19/18 1:45 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 1:48 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Add DT binding documentation for the Linux driver for the SiFive
asynchronous serial IP block. Nothing too exotic.

Cc: linux-serial@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx>
---
.../bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt | 21 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8982338512f5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/sifive-serial.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+SiFive asynchronous serial interface (UART)
+
+Required properties:
+
+- compatible: should be "sifive,fu540-c000-uart0" or "sifive,uart0"
I assume once again, the last '0' is a version?


Yes.


Palmer mentioned the
compatible string is part of the IP block repository?


It is, but there's no guarantee that the compatible string from the RTL will make it into a ROM for any given chip. For example, a customer may want the UART, but not want to take the DT ROM to keep area down.


This is one of the reasons why we'll likely switch to the usual software-maintained DTS files for Linux, just like the rest of arch/arm, arch/powerpc, etc.


As I mentioned for the
intc and now the pwm block bindings, if you are going to do version
numbers please document the versioning scheme.


Will add that to the binding document.


Where does the
number come from?


It comes from the RTL, which is public:

https://github.com/sifive/sifive-blocks/blob/master/src/main/scala/devices/uart/UART.scala#L43



What's the next version?


1 (or something larger)


Major vs. minor versions?


Not currently for this IP block.


ECO fixes?


ECOs for a specific chip? If so, whether an integrator changes the version number in a ROM (if present) is up to whomever does the ECO. That may not be SiFive.


Suppose that someone ECOs a SiFive UART in a way that incompatibly changes the programming model. They can choose to submit corresponding RTL changes back upstream to the sifive-blocks repository, or not.


If they don't, and they want upstream Linux support, it's up to the integrator to define a "foobar,foochip-uart" in their chip DT file, and post it upstream to the kernel lists, along with the corresponding driver patches.


If however, they do get their changes accepted into the sifive-blocks public RTL repository, then the maintainer of sifive-blocks is responsible for ensuring that the compatible string in the RTL is changed in an appropriate way.


Is the version s/w readable?


Not in the UART IP block itself.ÂÂ In the specific case of the FU540 chip, there's a string in a ROM.


How do you ensure it gets
updated?


The string in the ROM? For an IP block like the UART, it's up to the engineer patching the UART RTL to update the compatible string when the programming model changes, and the sifive-blocks maintainer to enforce it.

For a given chip, it's up to the integrator/end user whether they want to include the DT ROM or not, and if it's present, it's up to them what it contains.


All that should be addressed.

Otherwise, don't do version numbers because we have no visibility to
what they mean.


It's all in the public RTL:

https://github.com/sifive/sifive-blocks/blob/master/src/main/scala/devices/uart/UART.scala#L43


+- reg: address and length of the register space
+- interrupt-parent: should contain a phandle pointing to the SoC interrupt
+ controller device node that the UART interrupts are connected to
Don't need to document interrupt-parent here.


OK, will drop it.


- Paul