Re: [PATCH 4/5] arm64: dts: renesas: r9a07g044(l1): Correct GICD and GICR sizes

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Prabhakar,

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 4:59 PM Lad, Prabhakar
<prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 3:53 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 3:41 PM Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > The RZ/G2L SoC is equipped with the GIC-600. The GICD + GICDA is 128kB,
> > > and the GICR is 128kB per CPU.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 68a45525297b2 ("arm64: dts: renesas: Add initial DTSI for RZ/G2{L,LC} SoC's")
> > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Thanks for your patch!
> >
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044.dtsi
> > > @@ -1043,8 +1043,8 @@ gic: interrupt-controller@11900000 {
> > >                         #interrupt-cells = <3>;
> > >                         #address-cells = <0>;
> > >                         interrupt-controller;
> > > -                       reg = <0x0 0x11900000 0 0x40000>,
> > > -                             <0x0 0x11940000 0 0x60000>;
> > > +                       reg = <0x0 0x11900000 0 0x20000>,
> > > +                             <0x0 0x11940000 0 0x40000>;
> > >                         interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
> > >                 };
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044l1.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044l1.dtsi
> > > index 9cf27ca9f1d2..6f4d4dc13f50 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044l1.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044l1.dtsi
> > > @@ -16,3 +16,8 @@ cpus {
> > >                 /delete-node/ cpu@100;
> > >         };
> > >  };
> > > +
> > > +&gic {
> > > +       reg = <0x0 0x11900000 0 0x20000>,
> > > +             <0x0 0x11940000 0 0x20000>;
> > > +};
> >
> > What's the point of overriding this here?
> >
> Are you suggesting we drop this, as we have no users for it currently?

I didn't mean to drop it because we have no users of r9a07g044l1.dtsi.
I am just wondering what would be the side-effect of not overriding it?
After all, all r9a07g044 SoC variants have the same GIC hardware block?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds