Hi Vignesh, On Thu Apr 9, 2026 at 11:46 AM CEST, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: > Hi Markus > > On 08/04/26 20:33, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:14 AM Markus Schneider-Pargmann (TI) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Split the firmware memory region in more specific parts so it is better >>> described where which information is stored. Specifically the LPM metadata >>> region is important as bootloader software like U-Boot has to know where >>> that data is to be able to read that data and resume from RAM. >>> >>> IO+DDR is a deep sleep state in which a few pins are set to be sensitive >>> for wakeup while the DDR is kept in self refresh. Everything else is >>> powered off. >>> >>> The changes in this series were suggested as part of the IO+DDR u-boot >>> series: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] >>> >>> There are currently no real users of the memory-region that is split in >>> this series. The size of the memory-region in total stays the same. >>> The new layout is derived from the software running on the r5f >>> processor: >>> >>> https://github.com/TexasInstruments/mcupsdk-core-k3/blob/k3_main/examples/drivers/ipc/ipc_rpmsg_echo_linux/am62ax-sk/r5fss0-0_freertos/ti-arm-clang/linker.cmd#L172 >>> >>> https://github.com/TexasInstruments/mcupsdk-core-k3/blob/k3_main/source/drivers/device_manager/sciclient.h#L459 >>> >>> Additionally the two important devicetree nodes for resuming from IO+DDR >>> have the bootph-pre-ram flag added as this data needs to be read before >>> the RAM is in use. >>> >>> Best >>> Markus >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Markus Schneider-Pargmann (TI) <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> Changes in v3: >>> - Squash the enforcement of the memory-region-names requirement in the >>> patch adding the memory-region-names, as suggested. >>> - Link to v2: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260312-topic-am62a-ioddr-dt-v6-19-v2-0-37cb7ceec...@baylibre.com >>> >>> Changes in v2: >>> - Make memory-region-names required if memory-region is present >>> - Fixup memory-region and memory-region-names conditions. Require either >>> 2 or 6 regions for memory-region and memory-region-names >>> - Reword and restructure the binding documentation for memory-region and >>> memory-region-names >>> - Add memory-region-names to all uses of memory-region >>> - Link to v1: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260303-topic-am62a-ioddr-dt-v6-19-v1-0-12fe72bb4...@baylibre.com >>> >>> --- >>> Markus Schneider-Pargmann (TI) (7): >>> dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Split up memory regions >>> dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-r5f: Add memory-region-names >>> arm64: dts: ti: k3: Use memory-region-names for r5f >>> arm64: dts: ti: k3-am62a7-sk: Split r5f memory region >>> arm64: dts: ti: k3-am62p5-sk: Split r5f memory region >>> arm64: dts: ti: k3-am62a7-sk: Add r5f nodes to pre-ram bootphase >>> arm64: dts: ti: k3-am62p5-sk: Add r5f nodes to pre-ram bootphase >> >> TI folks, Please make sure these dts patches are picked up for 7.1. >> There's now a crap load of warnings in next with the binding change: >> >> 58 (ti,am62-r5fss): r5f@78000000: 'memory-region-names' is a >> required property > > [...] > >> If they aren't applied, making 'memory-region-names' required needs >> to be dropped from the binding. >> > > This breaks DT backward compatibility. Why is memory-region-names now a > required item and cannot be assumed as "dma" and "firmware" as default? > Is that intentional (should have at least had a Fixes tag then if the > original definition was wrong)?
Conor suggested to make the memory-region-names required for easier distinction of the layouts: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260303-payphone-pancake-b6068c545bc3@spud/ And a follow-up discussion here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260313-kettle-craftily-aa087e6b74db@spud/ Also I don't think it really breaks backward compatibility. I don't think there is any user for it and the previous binding documentation only refers to it as reserved regions. Best Markus
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
