Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Wed, 24 Jan 2024 18:17:16 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: hwinfo: Add Qualcomm's board-id types | From | Amrit Anand <> |
| |
On 1/22/2024 11:40 PM, Elliot Berman wrote: > > On 1/22/2024 2:07 AM, Amrit Anand wrote: >> On 1/20/2024 7:02 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>> On 20.01.2024 12:20, Amrit Anand wrote: >>>> Qualcomm based DT uses two or three different identifiers. The SoC >>>> based idenfier which signifies chipset and the revision for those >>>> chipsets. The board based identifier is used to distinguish different >>>> boards (e.g. IDP, MTP) along with the different types of same boards. >>>> The PMIC attached to the board can also be used as a identifier for >>>> device tree. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Amrit Anand <quic_amrianan@quicinc.com> >>>> --- >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/qcom,board-id.yaml | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> include/dt-bindings/arm/qcom,ids.h | 68 +++++++++++++++-- >>>> 2 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/qcom,board-id.yaml >>>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/qcom,board-id.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/qcom,board-id.yaml >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000..807f134 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/qcom,board-id.yaml >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@ >>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) >>>> +%YAML 1.2 >>>> +--- >>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/hwinfo/qcom,board-id.yaml# >>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>> + >>>> +title: QCOM Board Identifier for Devicetree Selection >>>> + >>>> +maintainers: >>>> + - Amrit Anand <quic_amrianan@quicinc.com> >>>> + - Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com> >>>> + >>>> +description: | >>> The '|'s are unnecessary in both commits, IIRC they're used for >>> preserving formatting which we don't really need for non-styled >>> plaintext >> Sure, will do. >>>> + Qualcomm uses two and sometimes three hardware identifiers to describe >>>> + its boards >>>> + - a SoC identifier is used to match chipsets (e.g. sm8550 vs sm8450) >>>> + - a board identifier is used to match board form factor (e.g. MTP, QRD, >>>> + ADP, CRD) >>>> + - a PMIC identifier is occasionally used when different PMICs are used >>>> + for a given board/SoC combination. >>>> + Each field and helper macros are defined at:: >>>> + - include/dt-bindings/arm/qcom,ids.h >>>> + >>>> + For example, >>>> + / { >>>> + #board-id-cells = <2>; >>>> + board-id = <456 0>, <457 0>, <10 0>; >>>> + board-id-types = "qcom,soc-id", "qcom,soc-id", "qcom,board-id"; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> +allOf: >>>> + - $ref: board-id.yaml# >>>> + >>>> +properties: >>>> + board-id: >>>> + minItems: 2 >>> I believe some older platforms match exclusively based on socid, so >>> perhaps 1 would be okay as well. >>> >>> [...] >> Ok, considering legacy targets we can make it 1. >> >> But i think ideally it should always be recommended to have a board ID associated with a SoC ID, correct me if my understanding is wrong. >> > There is no "legacy" support needed here: Qualcomm's bootloaders > need to be updated to adhere to the new proposed spec. I suppose > we need to consider whether we have targets that only need SoC to > differentiate? > >>>> +examples: >>>> + - | >>>> + #include <dt-bindings/arm/qcom,ids.h> >>>> + / { >>>> + model = "Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. sc7280 IDP SKU1 platform"; >>>> + compatible = "qcom,sc7280-idp", "google,senor", "qcom,sc7280"; >>>> + >>>> + #board-id-cells = <2>; >>>> + board-id = <QCOM_SOC_ID(SC7280) QCOM_SOC_REVISION(1)>, >>>> + <QCOM_SOC_ID(SC7280) QCOM_SOC_REVISION(2)>, >>>> + <QCOM_BOARD_ID(IDP, 1, 0) QCOM_BOARD_SUBTYPE(UFS, ANY, 1)>; >>>> + board-id-types = "qcom,soc-id", >>>> + "qcom,soc-id", >>>> + "qcom,board-id"; >>> So, would the matching here would be: >>> >>> loop over disctinct board-id-types >>> check if there's at least 1 match for all of them >>> use this dtb if that's the case >>> >>> stop booting / "best guess match" >>> >>> ? >>> >>> [...] >> Yes, But the "if" checking would have preference in place. >> The preference logic would look something like this, >> >> First will check for SoC-ID, if we have an exact match for SoC-ID then will proceed for board-ID match. Otherwise the DT would be discarded. >> Once (exact) board-ID found, will proceed for subtype , pmic and so on. >> Exact match and best match logic is used. Parameters like SoC-ID, board-ID are required to be best matched. Other few fields follow best match logic and best of the DT can be picked. >> >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_MTP 0x8 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_DRAGONBOARD 0x10 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_QRD 0x11 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_HDK 0x1F >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_ATP 0x21 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_IDP 0x22 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_SBC 0x24 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_QXR 0x26 >>>> +#define QCOM_BOARD_ID_CRD 0x28 >>> Missing ADP/QCP/Ride (if they're separate) >> Sure, will update. Would need to work with teams. > There are probably more boards that we aren't aware of. > > Amrit, please add board IDs for all the boards that are > in kernel.org.
Sure, will do that.
Thanks, Amrit
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |