Re: [PATCH 1/2] soc: imx-sc: add i.MX system controller soc driver support

[Abel Vesa]

On 19-05-10 10:42:17, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 08:48:56AM +0000, Leonard Crestez wrote:
> > On 4/22/2019 9:46 AM, Anson Huang wrote:
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Anson Huang
> > >>> From: Shawn Guo [mailto:shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > >>> On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 03:40:00PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > >>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 06:49:12AM +0000, Anson Huang wrote:
> > >>>>> i.MX8QXP is an ARMv8 SoC which has a Cortex-M4 system controller
> > >>>>> inside, the system controller is in charge of controlling power,
> > >>>>> clock and fuse etc..
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This patch adds i.MX system controller soc driver support, Linux
> > >>>>> kernel has to communicate with system controller via MU (message
> > >>>>> unit) IPC to get soc revision, uid etc..
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> With this patch, soc info can be read from sysfs:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>   drivers/soc/imx/Kconfig      |   7 ++
> > >>>>>   drivers/soc/imx/Makefile     |   1 +
> > >>>>>   drivers/soc/imx/soc-imx-sc.c | 220
> > >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>>>   3 files changed, 228 insertions(+)  create mode 100644
> > >>>>> drivers/soc/imx/soc-imx-sc.c
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Rather than creating a new driver, please take a look at Abel's
> > >>>> generic
> > >>>> i.MX8 SoC driver, and see if it can be extended to cover i.MX8QXP.
> > >>
> > >> Got it, I didn't notice that this patch bas been accepted, I will redo the patch
> > >> based on it, thanks.
> > > 
> > > I have sent the new patch set to support i.MX8QXP SoC revision based on generic i.MX8
> > > SoC driver, however, the Kconfig modification is NOT good, it may break i.MX8MQ if IMX_SCU
> > > is NOT enabled, although we can add some warp function for SCU firmware API call to fix it,
> > > but after further thought and discussion with Dong Aisheng, I think we may need to roll back to
> > > use this patch series to create a new SoC driver dedicated for i.MX8 SoCs
> > > with system controller inside, such as i.MX8QXP, i.MX8QM etc., the reason are as below:
> > > 
> > > For i.MX8MQ/i.MX8MM:
> > > 	1. SoC driver does NOT depends on i.MX SCU firmware, so no need to use platform driver
> > > 	     probe model, just device_init phase call is good enough;
> > > 	2. The SoC driver no need to depends on IMX_SCU, so it can be always built in, no need to
> > > 	     check IMX_SCU config;
> > > 	3. The fuse check for CPU speed grading, HDCP status, NoC settings etc. could be added to this driver,
> > > 	    but they are ONLY for i.MX8MQ/i.MX8MM etc..
> > > For i.MX8QXP/i.MX8QM:
> > > 	1. SoC driver MUST depends on IMX_SCU;
> > > 	2. MUST use platform model to support defer probe;
> > > 	3. No fuse check for CPU speed grading.
> > > 
> > > So, I guess the reused code for i.MX8MQ and i.MX8QXP is ONLY those part of creating SoC id device node (less than
> > > 30% I think), all other functions are implemented in total different ways, that is why I created the imx_sc_soc driver
> > > in this patch series, so do you think we can add new SoC driver for i.MX8 SoC with SCU inside? Putting 2 different architecture
> > > SoCs' driver into 1 file looks like NOT making enough sense.
> > 
> > +1 for separate SOC driver. The 8mq/8mm and 8qm/8qxp families are very 
> > different, they just happen to share the imx8 prefix.
> > 
> > It makes sense to allow people to compile one without the other and this 
> > is easier with distinct SOC drivers.

Totally agree.

> 
> Leonard, Abel,
> 
> Can you guys help review the patch?  Thanks.
> 
> Shawn

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@xxxxxxx>