[PATCH TIP 03/14] x86/dtb: Add a device tree for CE4100
David Gibson
david at gibson.dropbear.id.au
Thu Jan 27 16:00:27 EST 2011
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 09:58:51AM +0530, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Cc: devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy at linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie at gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts | 228 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 228 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts b/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..c2df5c8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,228 @@
> +/*
> + * CE4100 on Falcon Falls
> + *
> + * (c) Copyright 2010 Intel Corporation
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> + * under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
> + * Free Software Foundation; version 2 of the License.
> + */
> +/dts-v1/;
> +/ {
> + model = "intel,falconfalls";
> + compatible = "intel,falconfalls";
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> +
> + cpus {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> +
> + cpu at 0 {
> + device_type = "cpu";
> + compatible = "intel,ce4100";
> + reg = <0>;
> + lapic = <&lapic0>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> + soc at 0 {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> + compatible = "intel,ce4100-immr";
> + ranges;
IMMR is probably not the name you want. I'm guessing you're taking
this by anology with the IMMR thingies in Freescale chips. However in
that case the name is coming from the IMMR register which can
physically relocate the batch of IOs represented by the node. You
should probably name it something appropriate to your chip instead.
> + ioapic1: pic at fec00000 {
The name should be "interrupt-controller" rather than pic.
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + compatible = "intel,ioapic-ce4100", "intel,ioapic";
> + interrupt-controller;
> + reg = <0xfec00000 0x1000>;
> + };
> +
> + timer at fed00000 {
> + compatible = "intel,hpet-ce4100", "intel,hpet";
> + reg = <0xfed00000 0x200>;
> + };
> +
> + lapic0: interrupt-controller at fee00000 {
> + compatible = "intel,lapic-ce4100", "intel,lapic";
> + reg = <0xfee00000 0x1000>;
> + };
> +
> + pci at 3fc {
> + #address-cells = <3>;
> + #interrupt-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <2>;
> + compatible = "intel,ce4100-pci", "pci";
> + device_type = "pci";
> + bus-range = <0 0>;
> + ranges = <0x2000000 0 0xbffff000 0xbffff000 0 0x1000
> + 0x2000000 0 0xdffe0000 0xdffe0000 0 0x1000
> + 0x0000000 0 0x0 0x0 0 0x100>;
> +
> + isa at 0 {
> + #address-cells = <2>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> + compatible = "isa";
> + ranges = <1 0 0 0 0 0x100>;
> +
> + rtc at 70 {
> + compatible = "intel,ce4100-rtc", "motorola,mc146818";
> + interrupts = <8 3>;
> + interrupt-parent = <&ioapic1>;
> + ctrl-reg = <2>;
> + freq-reg = <0x26>;
> + reg = <1 0x70 2>;
> + };
Is the rtc really wired directly to the ioapic without going through
the cascaded i8259 which usually inhabits isa busses?
> + };
> +
> + /* Secondary IO-APIC */
> + ioapic2: pic at bffff000 {
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + compatible = "intel,ioapic-ce4100", "intel,ioapic";
> + interrupt-controller;
> + reg = <0x100 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0>;
> + assigned-addresses = <0x02000000 0x0 0xbffff000 0x0 0x1000>;
If this is a cascaded interrupt controller, then it should have an
interrupts and interrupt-parent property to point at the correct
cascade interrupt on the master ioapic.
> + };
> +
> + pci at av {
> + #address-cells = <3>;
> + #interrupt-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <2>;
> + compatible = "intel,ce4100-pci";
> + device_type = "pci";
> + bus-range = <1 1>;
> + ranges = <0x2000000 0 0xdffe0000 0x2000000 0 0xdffe0000 0 0x1000>;
> +
> + interrupt-map-mask = <0xffffff 0x0 0x0 0x0>;
> + interrupt-map = <
> + /* GFX: 0x2E5B */
> + 0x11000 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 0 0x1
> + /* ***** FIXME ****** Compositing Engine: 0x2E72 */
> + /* 0x11100 0x0 0x0 0x1 &ioapic2 0 0x1 */
> + /* MFD: 0x2E5C */
> + 0x11800 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 2 0x1
> + /* TS Prefilter: 0x2E5D */
> + 0x12000 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 4 0x1
> + /* TS Demux: 0x2E5E */
> + 0x12100 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 5 0x1
> + /* ***** FIXME ***** Audio DSP: 0x2E5F */
> + /* 0x13000 0x0 0x0 0x1 &ioapic2 0 0x1 */
> + /* Audio Interfaces: 0x2E60 */
> + 0x13200 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 8 0x1
> + /* VDC: 0x2E61 */
> + 0x14000 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 9 0x1
> + /* DPE: 0x2E62 */
> + 0x14100 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 10 0x1
> + /* HDMI Tx: 0x2E63 */
> + 0x14200 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 11 0x1
> + /* SEC: 0x2E64 */
> + 0x14800 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 12 0x1
> + /* EXP: 0x2E65 */
> + 0x15000 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 13 0x1
> + /* UART0/1: 0x2E66 */
> + 0x15800 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 14 0x1
> + /* GPIO: 0x2E67 */
> + 0x15900 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 15 0x1
> + /* I2C0/1/2: 0x2E68 */
> + 0x15a00 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 16 0x1
> + /* Smart Card 0/1: 0x2E69 */
> + 0x15b00 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 15 0x1
> + /* SPI: 0x2E6A */
> + 0x15c00 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 15 0x1
> + /* MSPOD: 0x2E6B */
> + 0x15d00 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 19 0x1
> + /* IR: 0x2E6C */
> + 0x15e00 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 16 0x1
> + /* **** FIXME ***** DFX: 0x2E6D */
> + /* 0x15f00 0x0 0x0 0x1 &ioapic2 0x0 0x1 */
> + /* Gig Ethernet: 0x2E6E */
> + 0x16000 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 21 0x1
> + /* IEEE1588 and Clock Recovery Unit: 0x2E6F */
> + 0x16100 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 3 0x1
> + /* USB0: 0x2E70 */
> + 0x16800 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 22 0x3
> + /* USB1: 0x2E70 */
> + 0x16900 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 22 0x3
> + /* SATA: 0x2E71 */
> + 0x17000 0x0 0x0 0x0 &ioapic2 23 0x3
Are all these interrupt map entries representing on-board PCI devices
that have their interrupts wired direct to the APIC, instead of via
the PCI INTA..D lines? If so, it might be better to create device
nodes for those devices with interrupts and interrupt-parent
properties giving their interrupt routing, leaving the PCI bus's
interrupt-map to describe only the routing for slotted PCI devices
with their INTA..D wired with the rest of the PCI lines.
> + >;
> +
> + i2c-controller at 15a00,0,0 {
Uh.. that unit address does not look right. The encoding of PCI
3-cell addresses into a unit address string is not simply comma
separated cells. I forget the details, so you'll need to check the OF
PCI binding.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list