Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] arm64: dts: sc7280: Add QUPv3 wrapper_1 nodes

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Fri 04 Jun 08:54 CDT 2021, Roja Rani Yarubandi wrote:

> Add QUPv3 wrapper_1 DT nodes for SC7280 SoC.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roja Rani Yarubandi <rojay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in V3:
>  - Broken the huge V2 patch into 3 smaller patches.
>    1. QSPI DT nodes
>    2. QUP wrapper_0 DT nodes
>    3. QUP wrapper_1 DT nodes
> 
> Changes in V2:
>  - As per Doug's comments removed pinmux/pinconf subnodes.
>  - As per Doug's comments split of SPI, UART nodes has been done.
>  - Moved QSPI node before aps_smmu as per the order.
> 
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts |   4 +
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi    | 751 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 755 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> index f57458dbe763..bdea9bf4eeca 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
> @@ -288,6 +288,10 @@ &qupv3_id_0 {
>  	status = "okay";
>  };
>  
> +&qupv3_id_1 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
>  &uart5 {
>  	status = "okay";
>  };
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> index b783f5622a66..348a34f3448e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> @@ -881,6 +881,437 @@ uart7: serial@99c000 {
>  			};
>  		};
>  
> +		qupv3_id_1: geniqup@ac0000 {
> +			compatible = "qcom,geni-se-qup";
> +			reg = <0 0x00ac0000 0 0x2000>;
> +			clock-names = "m-ahb", "s-ahb";
> +			clocks = <&gcc GCC_QUPV3_WRAP_1_M_AHB_CLK>,
> +				 <&gcc GCC_QUPV3_WRAP_1_S_AHB_CLK>;
> +			#address-cells = <2>;
> +			#size-cells = <2>;
> +			ranges;
> +			iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x43 0x0>;
> +			interconnects = <&clk_virt MASTER_QUP_CORE_1 0 &clk_virt SLAVE_QUP_CORE_1 0>;
> +			interconnect-names = "qup-core";

We used to have interconnect votes for the wrapper, but I recently
merged patches that dropped these for sc7180, so please conclude which
way this should be.

The rest looks good.

Regards,
Bjorn