Re: [PATCH 12/12] arm64: dts: exynos: Add Exynos850 SoC support

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>]

On 06/08/2021 14:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/08/2021 14:07, Sam Protsenko wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 10:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/08/2021 01:06, Sam Protsenko wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2021 at 12:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch adds minimal SoC support. Particular board device tree files
>>>>>> can include exynos850.dtsi file to get SoC related nodes, and then
>>>>>> reference those nodes further as needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  .../boot/dts/exynos/exynos850-pinctrl.dtsi    | 782 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850-usi.dtsi |  30 +
>>>>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi     | 245 ++++++
>>>>>
>>>>> Not buildable. Missing Makefile, missing DTS. Please submit with initial
>>>>> DTS, otherwise no one is able to verify it even compiles.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This device is not available for purchase yet. I'll send the patch for
>>>> board dts once it's announced. I can do all the testing for now, if
>>>> you have any specific requests. Would it be possible for us to review
>>>> and apply only SoC support for now? Will send v2 soon...
>>>
>>> What you propose is equal to adding a driver (C source code) without
>>> ability to compile it. What's the point of having it in the kernel? It's
>>> unverifiable, unbuildable and unusable.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I understand. That's adding code with no users, and it's not a
>> good practice.
>>
>>> We can review the DTSI however merging has to be with a DTS. Usually the
>>> SoC vendor adds first an evalkit (e.g. SMDK board). Maybe you have one
>>> for Exynos850? Otherwise if you cannot disclose the actual board, the
>>> DTSI will have to wait. You can submit drivers, though.
>>>
>>
>> Sure, let's go this way. I'll send v2 soon. Improving patches and
>> having Reviewed-by tag for those would good enough for me at this
>> point. I'll continue to prepare another Exynos850 related patches
>> until the actual board is announced, like proper clock driver, reset,
>> MMC, etc. Is it ok if I send those for a review too (so I can fix all
>> issues ahead)?
> 
> Sure, prepare all necessary drivers earlier. I suspect clocks will be a
> real pain because of significant changes modeled in vendor kernel. I
> remember Paweł Chmiel (+Cc) was doing something for these:
> https://github.com/PabloPL/linux/tree/exynos7420
> 
> I mentioned before - you should also modify the chipid driver. Check
> also other drivers in drivers/soc/samsung, although some are needed only
> for suspend&resume.
> 

You can also take a look at Exynos8895 efforts:
https://github.com/ivoszbg/linux/commits/for-upstream/exynos8895

Since knowledge, datasheets and efforts are quite spread all over, I
keep track of some work here:
https://exynos.wiki.kernel.org/community


Best regards,
Krzysztof