Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] arm64: dts: ti: Introduce AM62P5 SoC and board

[Vignesh Raghavendra]

On 15/08/23 12:29, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
> 
> 
> On 15/08/23 02:24, Andrew Davis wrote:
>> On 8/14/23 2:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 12/08/2023 00:49, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>>>> Hi Vignesh Raghavendra,
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2023 00:14:29 +0530, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>>>> This series adds basic support for AM62P family of SoCs and
>>>>> specifically
>>>>> AM62P5 variant. Also adds AM62P5-SK support with basic peripheral
>>>>> like UART.
>>>>>
>>>>> TRM at [0] and Schematics is at [1]
>>>>>
>>>>> [0]: https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/spruj83
>>>>> [1]: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/sprr487
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> Note: since the changes were trivial, I incorporated the cosmetic
>>>> fixup suggested by Andrew locally when I applied. I have also dropped
>>>> bootph property from board's reserved nodes inline with what we did
>>>> for j721s2[2]. Thanks for the bootlog.
>>>>
>>>> I have applied the following to branch ti-k3-dts-next on [1].
>>>> Thank you!
>>>>
>>>> [1/3] dt-bindings: arm: ti: Add bindings for AM62P5 SoCs
>>>>        commit: b57fc5cbdbdfd04d44697800a9d59aeb3be2f273
>>>> [2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Introduce AM62P5 family of SoCs
>>>>        commit: 29075cc09f43a024d962da66d2e4f9eb577713d0
>>>> [3/3] arm64: dts: ti: Add support for the AM62P5 Starter Kit
>>>>        commit: 935c4047d42e53a06ec768ddc495a44f6869209c
>>>>
>>>
>>> A bit too fast. simple-mfd *is not allowed* on its own.
>>>
>> We have the rule against ['syscon', 'simple-mfd'], which requires a 3rd
>> specific compatible, but it seems 'simple-mfd' is allowed in the same way
>> as "simple-bus" (not sure how or why, I would expect a `failed to match any
>> schema with compatible`, but I'm not getting that either?).
>>
> 
> Indeed, I didn't see any warnings from dtbs_check so far
> 
>> We can add something like simple-mfd.yaml for this to explicitly check that
>> the compatible has minItems: 2.
>>
>> But in this case these seem to be just a typo and we meant "simple-bus"
>> here,
>> then it got copy/pasted over our k3 tree.
>>
> 
> I dont think "simple-bus" is enough due to presence to TI specific
> property (ti,sci-dev-id). So this will warrant a separate yaml bindings.
>  I will work towards adding such a file.


Unfortunately that cannot be dropped, it indicates the navss instance to 
be used during PSIL pairing [0] (PSIL proxy to use). 

Looking again at simple-bus.yaml in dt-schema repo, I do see arbitrary 
properties are accepted [1]. But I am not sure if its means device
specific properties are acceptable?

[0] https://software-dl.ti.com/tisci/esd/latest/2_tisci_msgs/rm/rm_psil.html
[1] https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/blob/main/dtschema/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#L60

> 

-- 
Regards
Vignesh