Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: qcom: sdx65: add IPA information

[Alex Elder]

On 3/25/23 7:12 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 25.03.2023 12:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 24/03/2023 21:15, Alex Elder wrote:
> > > Add IPA-related nodes and definitions to "sdx65.dtsi".  The SMP2P
> > > nodes (ipa_smp2p_out and ipa_smp2p_in) are already present.
> > >
> > > Enable IPA in "sdx65-mtp.dts"; this GSI firmware is loaded by Trust
> > > Zone on this platform.
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts |  5 ++++
> > >   arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi    | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts
> > > index ed98c83c141fc..72e25de0db5fc 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts
> > > @@ -245,6 +245,11 @@ &blsp1_uart3 {
> > >   	status = "okay";
> > >   };
> > >   
> > > +&ipa {
> > > +	qcom,gsi-loader = "skip";
> > > +	status = "okay";
> > > +};
> > > +
> > >   &qpic_bam {
> > >   	status = "okay";
> > >   };
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi
> > > index 192f9f94bc8b4..360d6dc144811 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi
> > > @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> > >   #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> > >   #include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h>
> > >   #include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
> > > +#include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,sdx65.h>
> > >   
> > >   / {
> > >   	#address-cells = <1>;
> > > @@ -299,6 +300,43 @@ tcsr_mutex: hwlock@1f40000 {
> > >   			#hwlock-cells = <1>;
> > >   		};
> > >   
> > > +		ipa: ipa@3e04000 {
> > > +			compatible = "qcom,sdx65-ipa";
> > > +
> > > +			iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x5e0 0x0>,
> > > +				 <&apps_smmu 0x5e2 0x0>;
> > > +			reg = <0x3f40000 0x10000>,
> > > +			      <0x3f50000 0x5000>,
> > > +			      <0x3e04000 0xfc000>;
> > > +			reg-names = "ipa-reg",
> > > +				    "ipa-shared",
> > > +				    "gsi";
> > > +
> > > +			interrupts-extended = <&intc GIC_SPI 241 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> > > +					      <&intc GIC_SPI 47 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > > +					      <&ipa_smp2p_in 0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> > > +					      <&ipa_smp2p_in 1 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> > > +			interrupt-names = "ipa",
> > > +					   "gsi",
> > > +					   "ipa-clock-query",
> > > +					   "ipa-setup-ready";
> >
> > These look misaligned.
> >
> > With above:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> With this and moving iommus below interconnect:

Is there guidance somewhere that states what order should be
used for these properties?  Why should iommus be below
interconnects?

As I said to Krzysztof, I *think* all of the IPA nodes look
like this; should all of them be updated to follow whatever
the preferred convention is?

Thanks.

					-Alex


> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Konrad
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof