[PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: dts: nuvoton: npcm845: Add peripheral nodes

[Andrew Jeffery]

Hi Tomer,

On Sun, 2025-09-21 at 18:56 +0300, Tomer Maimon wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> Thanks for your comments.
> 
> On Wed, 10 Sept 2025 at 10:52, Andrew Jeffery
> <andrew at codeconstruct.com.au> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Tomer,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 15:59 +0300, Tomer Maimon wrote:
> > > Enable peripheral support for the Nuvoton NPCM845 SoC by adding
> > > device
> > > nodes for Ethernet controllers, MMC controller, SPI controllers,
> > > USB
> > > device controllers, random number generator, ADC, PWM-FAN
> > > controller,
> > > and I2C controllers. Include pinmux configurations for relevant
> > > peripherals to support hardware operation. Add an OP-TEE firmware
> > > node
> > > for secure services.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77 at gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../dts/nuvoton/nuvoton-common-npcm8xx.dtsi   | 702
> > > +++++++++++++++++-
> > >  .../boot/dts/nuvoton/nuvoton-npcm845.dtsi     |   7 +
> > >  2 files changed, 708 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nuvoton/nuvoton-common-
> > > npcm8xx.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nuvoton/nuvoton-common-
> > > npcm8xx.dtsi
> > > index 24133528b8e9..7f120da3310a 100644
> > > 
> > 
> > *snip*
> > 
> > > +               fiu1: spi at fb002000 {
> > > +                       compatible = "nuvoton,npcm845-fiu";
> > > +                       #address-cells = <1>;
> > > +                       #size-cells = <0>;
> > > +                       reg = <0x0 0xfb002000 0x0 0x1000>;
> > > +                       reg-names = "control";
> > > +                       clocks =  <&clk NPCM8XX_CLK_SPI1>;
> > > +                       clock-names = "clk_spi1";
> > > +                       pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > +                       pinctrl-0 = <&spi1_pins>;
> > > +                       status = "disabled";
> > > +               };
> > > +
> > > +               fiu3: spi at c0000000 {
> > > +                       compatible = "nuvoton,npcm845-fiu";
> > > +                       #address-cells = <1>;
> > > +                       #size-cells = <0>;
> > > +                       reg = <0x0 0xc0000000 0x0 0x1000>;
> > > +                       reg-names = "control";
> > > +                       clocks =  <&clk NPCM8XX_CLK_SPI3>;
> > > +                       clock-names = "clk_spi3";
> > > +                       pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > +                       pinctrl-0 = <&spi3_pins>;
> > > +                       status = "disabled";
> > > +               };
> I don't need to move the FIU3 node as ordered by ascending unit
> address since the FIU3 node is a part of the FIU's group, am I
> correct?

It's acceptable by the linked coding standard, but my preference is for
the consistency of ordering by unit address.

> > > +
> > > +               fiux: spi at fb001000 {
> > > +                       compatible = "nuvoton,npcm845-fiu";
> > > +                       #address-cells = <1>;
> > > +                       #size-cells = <0>;
> > > +                       reg = <0x0 0xfb001000 0x0 0x1000>,
> > > +                       <0x0 0xf8000000 0x0 0x2000000>;
> > > +                       reg-names = "control", "memory";
> > > +                       clocks =  <&clk NPCM8XX_CLK_SPIX>;
> > > +                       clock-names = "clk_ahb";
> > > +                       status = "disabled";
> > > +               };
> > 
> > Can you please audit the patch (and the rest of the dtsi) to make
> > sure
> > all nodes are ordered by ascending unit address, as per the DTS
> > style
> > guide?
> > 
> > https://docs.kernel.org/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-style.html#order-of-nodes
> > 
> > Andrew
> > 
> > > +
> > > +               mc: memory-controller at f0824000 {
> > > +                       compatible = "nuvoton,npcm845-memory-
> > > controller";
> > > +                       reg = <0x0 0xf0824000 0x0 0x1000>;
> > > +                       interrupts = <GIC_SPI 25
> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > > +               };
> > > +
> > 
> > *snip*
> 
> I see disorder in the upstream dtsi file, for example, PECI order. Do
> you suggest fixing it?

If you don't mind, yes please (... as a separate patch) :)

Andrew