On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 03:49:40PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 10:39:55AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > >On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:23:29AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > >> From: Peng Fan <peng....@nxp.com> > >> > >> Add imx_rproc_cfg_imx95_m7 and address(TCM and DDR) mapping. > >> Add i.MX95 of_device_id entry. > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Daniel Baluta <daniel.bal...@nxp.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng....@nxp.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > >> b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > >> index > >> b1a117ca5e5795554b67eb7092db2a25fc7de13b..c226f78c84ad180c69804116d6cfcab19db6aaa5 > >> 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c > >> @@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ > >> > >> #define IMX_SC_IRQ_GROUP_REBOOTED 5 > >> > >> +/* Must align with System Manager Firmware */ > >> +#define IMX95_M7_CPUID 1 > >> +#define IMX95_M7_LMID 1 > > > >Any reason those aren't set in the device tree? > > Krzysztof rejected to introduce the IDs to devicetree. > > From IRC: > "To me this makes no sense in current explanayton - you have 8 cores, but only > one can be put there, so what happens with the rest? > And I don't think we care about something like remote and local ID - it is > the same. CPUs have single number. So this looks like copy paste downstream > and thus solve it internally first" > > > In System Manager Firmware, CPUID is fixed and will not change. > LMID is also fixed as of now, we not expect customer to change LMID. > > So with "fsl,imx95-m7", we could know the CPUID and LMID for M7, so > it does not make sense to introduce new property saying "fsl,imx95-lmid" > and "fsl,imx95-cpuid". This should be the main concern that DT maintainers > reject to add properties for the IDs. >
Ok > Thanks, > Peng > > > > >Thanks, > >Mathieu > >
