Subject: [PATCH 04/15] ARM: smp_twd: add device tree support

From: [email-masked] (Rob Herring)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:27:21 -0600

Adding devicetree-discuss since we are talking bindings...

On 01/12/2012 10:00 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 12/01/12 15:42, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On 01/12/2012 08:36 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Hi Rob,
>>>
>>> On 11/01/12 21:05, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>> On 01/11/2012 07:08 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>>> Add bindings to support DT discovery of the ARM Timer Watchdog
>>>>> (aka TWD). Only the timer side is converted by this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Rob Herring <[email-masked]>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <[email-masked]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/twd.txt |   29 +++++++++++
>>>>>  arch/arm/include/asm/smp_twd.h                |    1 +
>>>>>  arch/arm/kernel/smp_twd.c                     |   68 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>>>  3 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/twd.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/twd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/twd.txt
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000..a9d5587
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/twd.txt
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
>>>>> +* ARM Timer Watchdog
>>>>> +
>>>>> +ARM 11MP, Cortex-A5 and Cortex-A9 are often associated with a per-core
>>>>> +Timer-Watchdog (aka TWD), which provides both a per-cpu local timer
>>>>> +and watchdog.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +The TWD is usually attached to a GIC to deliver its two per-processor
>>>>> +interrupts.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +Main node required properties:
>>>>> +
>>>>> +- compatible : Should be one of:
>>>>> +	"arm,cortex-a9-twd"
>>>>> +	"arm,cortex-a5-twd"
>>>>> +	"arm,arm11mp-twd"
>>>>> +	"arm,smp-twd"
>>>>> +
>>>>> +- interrupts : Two interrupts to each core, the first one for the
>>>>> +  timer, the second one for the watchdog.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +- reg : Specify the base address and the size of the TWD.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +Example:
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	twd at 2c000600 {
>>>>> +		compatible = "arm,arm11mp-twd", "arm,smp-twd";
>>>>> +		reg = <0x2c000600 0x100>;
>>>>> +		interrupts = <1 13 0xf01 1 14 0xf01>;
>>>>> +	};
>>>>
>>>> Why not split the watchdog and timer into 2 nodes? It may not matter
>>>> since there is no driver for the timer. If there was, we would have a
>>>> problem as you can't match 2 drivers to 1 node.
>>>
>>> Don't we hit the opposite problem - two nodes with the same address?
>>
>> No, because the timer is at 0x600-0x61f and the watchdog is at
>> 0x620-0x63f. There's no DT requirement on address range start or size.
>>
>> However, the current watchdog driver includes 0x20 in its register
>> offsets, so changing the base address would require a change to the
>> driver (but that shouldn't really influence the decision).
> 
> Well, that's what triggered my question. On the other hand, I do not see
> any in-tree user of the mpcore_wdt driver, so I suppose we could change
> this register offset without too much harm.
> 
> How about something like:
> 
> 	twd-timer at 2c000600 {
> 		compatible = "arm,arm11mp-twd", "arm,smp-twd";
> 		reg = <0x2c000600 0x20>;
> 		interrupts = <1 13 0xf01>;
> 	};
> 
> 	twd-watchdog at 2c000620 {
> 		compatible = "arm,arm11mp-wd", "arm,smp-wd";
> 		reg = <0x2c000620 0x20>;
> 		interrupts = <1 14 0xf01>;

BTW, are these really edge triggered?

> 	};
> 
> I'm not sure about the compatible strings for the watchdog though. Any
> better idea?

Some reason I did arm,smp-twd and arm-cortex-a9-wdt for highbank.dts
which wasn't very consistent.

How about *-twd-timer and *-twd-wdt?

Probably we should drop the generic "arm-smp-*" versions.

Rob