Re: [PATCH 2/2] pmdomain: sunxi: Add support for A733 to Allwinner PCK600 driver
From: Yuanshen Cao
Date: Wed Mar 04 2026 - 19:16:01 EST
On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 10:33:23PM +0900, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 12:44 PM Yuanshen Cao <alex.caoys@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > The Allwinner A733 PCK600, similar to A523 PCK600, is likely a
> > customized version of ARM PCK-600 power controller. It shares
> > the same BSP driver with A523. According to the BSP provided
> > by Radxa, unlike A523, it doesn't require reset.
> >
> > Make reset optional in the sunxi pck600 driver and add support
> > for A733.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yuanshen Cao <alex.caoys@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pmdomain/sunxi/sun55i-pck600.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pmdomain/sunxi/sun55i-pck600.c b/drivers/pmdomain/sunxi/sun55i-pck600.c
> > index c7ab51514531..8f9fdc3915bd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pmdomain/sunxi/sun55i-pck600.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pmdomain/sunxi/sun55i-pck600.c
> > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct sunxi_pck600_desc {
> > u32 logic_power_switch0_delay;
> > u32 logic_power_switch1_delay;
> > u32 off2on_delay;
> > + bool has_rst_clk;
> > };
> >
> > struct sunxi_pck600_pd {
> > @@ -151,9 +152,11 @@ static int sunxi_pck600_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > if (IS_ERR(base))
> > return PTR_ERR(base);
> >
> > - rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_released(dev, NULL);
> > - if (IS_ERR(rst))
> > - return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(rst), "failed to get reset control\n");
> > + if (desc->has_rst_clk) {
> > + rst = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_released(dev, NULL);
> > + if (IS_ERR(rst))
> > + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(rst), "failed to get reset control\n");
> > + }
> >
> > clk = devm_clk_get_enabled(dev, NULL);
> > if (IS_ERR(clk))
> > @@ -193,7 +196,14 @@ static int sunxi_pck600_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > }
> >
> > static const char * const sun55i_a523_pck600_pd_names[] = {
> > - "VE", "GPU", "VI", "VO0", "VO1", "DE", "NAND", "PCIE"
> > + "VE",
> > + "GPU",
> > + "VI",
> > + "VO0",
> > + "VO1",
> > + "DE",
> > + "NAND",
> > + "PCIE",
>
> No need to change this part.
>
Yes, I agree. But since A733 has more pd_names, that line will be too
long if we stick with one line. And we also used this format in
sun20i-ppu. It might make more sense if we align with ppu. Please let
me know what you think. Thanks!
> > };
> >
> > static const struct sunxi_pck600_desc sun55i_a523_pck600_desc = {
> > @@ -206,7 +216,36 @@ static const struct sunxi_pck600_desc sun55i_a523_pck600_desc = {
> > .device_ctrl1_delay = 0xffff,
> > .logic_power_switch0_delay = 0x8080808,
> > .logic_power_switch1_delay = 0x808,
> > - .off2on_delay = 0x8
> > + .off2on_delay = 0x8,
> > + .has_rst_clk = true,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const char * const sun60i_a733_pck600_pd_names[] = {
> > + "VI",
> > + "DE_SYS",
> > + "VE_DEC",
> > + "VE_ENC",
> > + "NPU",
> > + "GPU_TOP",
> > + "GPU_CORE",
> > + "PCIE",
> > + "USB2",
> > + "VO",
> > + "VO1",
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct sunxi_pck600_desc sun60i_a733_pck600_desc = {
> > + .pd_names = sun60i_a733_pck600_pd_names,
> > + .num_domains = ARRAY_SIZE(sun60i_a733_pck600_pd_names),
> > + .logic_power_switch0_delay_offset = 0xc00,
> > + .logic_power_switch1_delay_offset = 0xc04,
> > + .off2on_delay_offset = 0xc10,
> > + .device_ctrl0_delay = 0x1f1f1f,
> > + .device_ctrl1_delay = 0x1f1f,
> > + .logic_power_switch0_delay = 0x8080808,
> > + .logic_power_switch1_delay = 0x808,
> > + .off2on_delay = 0x8,
> > + .has_rst_clk = false,
> > };
> >
> > static const struct of_device_id sunxi_pck600_of_match[] = {
> > @@ -214,6 +253,10 @@ static const struct of_device_id sunxi_pck600_of_match[] = {
> > .compatible = "allwinner,sun55i-a523-pck-600",
> > .data = &sun55i_a523_pck600_desc,
> > },
> > + {
> > + .compatible = "allwinner,sun60i-a733-pck-600",
> > + .data = &sun60i_a733_pck600_desc,
> > + },
> > {}
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sunxi_pck600_of_match);
> >
> > --
> > 2.53.0
> >