Tesla FSD is a derivative of Samsung Exynos SoC, thus just like the
others it reuses several devices from older designs. Historically we
kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no
bug here, however guidelines expressed in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
1. Compatibles should be specific.
2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add Tesla FSD compatible specific to be used with an existing fallback.
This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template.
No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205092229.19135-7-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
The DeviceTree Specification v0.3 specifies that the cache node
'compatible' and 'cache-level' properties are 'required'. Cf.
s3.8 Multi-level and Shared Cache Nodes
The 'cache-unified' property should be present if one of the
properties for unified cache is present ('cache-size', ...).
Update the Device Trees accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Pierre Gondois <pierre.gondois@arm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221123092449.88097-3-pierre.gondois@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Drive strength macros defined for FSD platform is not reflecting actual
names and values as per HW UM. FSD SoC pinctrl has following four levels
of drive-strength and their corresponding values:
Level-1 <-> 0
Level-2 <-> 1
Level-4 <-> 2
Level-6 <-> 3
The commit 684dac402f ("arm64: dts: fsd: Add initial pinctrl support")
used drive strength macros defined for Exynos4 SoC family. For some IPs
the macros values of Exynos4 matched and worked well, but Exynos4 SoC
family drive-strength (names and values) is not exactly matching with
FSD SoC.
Fix the drive strength macros to reflect actual names and values given
in FSD HW UM.
Fixes: 684dac402f ("arm64: dts: fsd: Add initial pinctrl support")
Signed-off-by: Padmanabhan Rajanbabu <p.rajanbabu@samsung.com>
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221013104024.50179-2-p.rajanbabu@samsung.com
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
The DTS uses hardware register values directly in pin controller pin
configuration. These are not some IDs or other abstraction layer but
raw numbers used in the registers.
These numbers were previously put in the bindings header to avoid code
duplication and to provide some context meaning (name), but they do not
fit the purpose of bindings. It is also quite confusing to use
constants prefixed with Exynos for other SoC, because there is actually
nothing here in common, except the actual value.
Store the constants in a header next to DTS and use them instead of
bindings.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Chanho Park <chanho61.park@samsung.com>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220605160508.134075-7-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
The pl330 DMA controller provides number of DMA channels and requests
through its registers, so duplicating this information (with a chance of
mistakes) in DTS is pointless. Additionally the DTS used always wrong
property names which causes DT schema check failures - the bindings
documented 'dma-channels' and 'dma-requests' properties without leading
hash sign.
Reported-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220430121902.59895-10-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
