Hi Eugen and Sumit, On 28/02/25 5:07 pm, Sumit Garg wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the > content is safe > > On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 at 16:45, Eugen Hristev <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2/28/25 12:58, Sumit Garg wrote: >>> On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 at 15:20, <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Eugen, >>>> >>>> On 27/02/25 7:48 pm, Eugen Hristev wrote: >>>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know >>>>> the content is safe >>>>> >>>>> On 2/27/25 12:37, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>> Hi Sumit, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27/02/25 3:14 pm, Sumit Garg wrote: >>>>>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know >>>>>>> the content is safe >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 at 15:06, Manikandan Muralidharan >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Add PMC clock definitions for MCK and UTMI which will be required >>>>>>>> for the sam9x7 OF_upstream DT since the clock framework is not in >>>>>>>> sync with Linux and also include this header in 'clock/at91.h' file >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You should rather drop these local DT bindings headers which will >>>>>>> allow dts/upstream/include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h to be included >>>>>>> automatically. >>>>>> Other SoC DTs where OF_UPSTREAM migration is not added yet, depends on >>>>>> the local DT bindings header, dropping this will lead to issues with >>>>>> compilation. >>>>>> We can drop this altogether when we sync the u-boot clock framework with >>>>>> Linux. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Sumit >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Manikandan Muralidharan <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> include/dt-bindings/clk/at91.h | 3 +++ >>>>>>>> include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h | 2 ++ >>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clk/at91.h >>>>>>>> b/include/dt-bindings/clk/at91.h >>>>>>>> index a178b94157b..016c6e0c620 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/include/dt-bindings/clk/at91.h >>>>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clk/at91.h >>>>>>>> @@ -24,4 +24,7 @@ >>>>>>>> #define USB_UTMI2 1 >>>>>>>> #define USB_UTMI3 2 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +#define PMC_MCK 1 >>>>>>>> +#define PMC_UTMI 2 >>>>> >>>>> Where in the patch series do you need these defines ? >>>>> >>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>> #endif >>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h >>>>>>>> b/include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h >>>>>>>> index ab3ee241d10..7235b3ba01e 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h >>>>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h >>>>>>>> @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ >>>>>>>> * Licensed under GPLv2 or later. >>>>>>>> */ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +#include <dt-bindings/clk/at91.h> >>>>>>>> + >>>>> >>>>> I find this odd to include one at91.h in another at91.h >>>>> >>>>> Let's consider to remove one of these files in the future, and have just >>>>> one that is identical with the bindings one from Linux >>>>> >>>>> Meanwhile, let's see where do you need the PMC_* >>>> The PMC_MCK and PMC_UTMI are defined in the dts/upstream sam9x7 SoC DT. >>>> since during compilation the clock/at91.h from u-boot is used and to >>>> resolve the syntax issues I had to declare them in clk/at91.h and >>>> include the header in clock/at91.h >> >> I don't understand this. So , compiling sam9x7 upstream DT with upstream >> at91.h should work. >> Do you have issues with sam9x7-u-boot.dtsi that fails build ? >> >>>> >>>> if we drop the clock/at91.h from u-boot, the sam9x75 will pass using the >>>> includes from upstream Linux but will break other SoC that has not >>>> migrated to OF_UPSTREAM yet. >> >> So you need to include clock/at91.h from upstream for sam9x75 and the >> other at91.h for older SoC. >> Does that work ? > > The way it works currently is you can have a single clock/at91.h > available where preference is currently given to local U-Boot copy > (for backwards compatibility) over what is available in upstream DT. > So can't have different versions of clock/at91.h available. > >> >>>> >>>> Or we can align u-boot's clock/at91.h with Linux and drop clk/at91.h, >>>> replace it with clock/at91.h in drivers and DT. >>>> Please let me know if that works. >>> >>> I would rather favor the U-Boot drivers and DT to directly use >>> dts/upstream/include/dt-bindings/clock/at91.h instead and drop local >>> DT bindings import. It then becomes easier for other SoCs to migrate >>> to OF_UPSTREAM too. >> >> Sumit, >> >> The problem is that there are two at91.h with different definitions for >> the same macros. (I know... legacy reasons..) >> The drivers have to be reworked to cope with the new values. Meanwhile I >> would say that at least the new SoCs should use the right macros/bindings > > Since the drivers are also common for both new and older SoCs, it's > rather better to adapt them to common bindings rather than supporting > 2 different versions of clock/at91.h. If you want to do that as part > of this series or later will be based on your preference.
To ensure consistency and compatibility with upstream, I'll rename the local clock/at91.h to clock/at91-pmc-status.h in U-Boot and update the relevant legacy SoC Device Trees to reflect this change. This will allow the new sam9x7 SoC DT and driver to utilize the standard upstream dt-bindings/clock/at91.h without modifications. We shall later refine at91-pmc-status.h during clock synchronization with Linux. Please let me know if this sounds good > > -Sumit > >> >>> >>> -Sumit >>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> #ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_CLK_AT91_H >>>>>>>> #define _DT_BINDINGS_CLK_AT91_H >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> 2.25.1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks and Regards, >>>> Manikandan M. >>>> >> -- Thanks and Regards, Manikandan M.
