| .. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 |
| |
| ======================== |
| Linux and the Devicetree |
| ======================== |
| |
| The Linux usage model for device tree data |
| |
| :Author: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> |
| |
| This article describes how Linux uses the device tree. An overview of |
| the device tree data format can be found on the device tree usage page |
| at devicetree.org\ [1]_. |
| |
| .. [1] https://www.devicetree.org/specifications/ |
| |
| The "Open Firmware Device Tree", or simply Devicetree (DT), is a data |
| structure and language for describing hardware. More specifically, it |
| is a description of hardware that is readable by an operating system |
| so that the operating system doesn't need to hard code details of the |
| machine. |
| |
| Structurally, the DT is a tree, or acyclic graph with named nodes, and |
| nodes may have an arbitrary number of named properties encapsulating |
| arbitrary data. A mechanism also exists to create arbitrary |
| links from one node to another outside of the natural tree structure. |
| |
| Conceptually, a common set of usage conventions, called 'bindings', |
| is defined for how data should appear in the tree to describe typical |
| hardware characteristics including data busses, interrupt lines, GPIO |
| connections, and peripheral devices. |
| |
| As much as possible, hardware is described using existing bindings to |
| maximize use of existing support code, but since property and node |
| names are simply text strings, it is easy to extend existing bindings |
| or create new ones by defining new nodes and properties. Be wary, |
| however, of creating a new binding without first doing some homework |
| about what already exists. There are currently two different, |
| incompatible, bindings for i2c busses that came about because the new |
| binding was created without first investigating how i2c devices were |
| already being enumerated in existing systems. |
| |
| 1. History |
| ---------- |
| The DT was originally created by Open Firmware as part of the |
| communication method for passing data from Open Firmware to a client |
| program (like to an operating system). An operating system used the |
| Device Tree to discover the topology of the hardware at runtime, and |
| thereby support a majority of available hardware without hard coded |
| information (assuming drivers were available for all devices). |
| |
| Since Open Firmware is commonly used on PowerPC and SPARC platforms, |
| the Linux support for those architectures has for a long time used the |
| Device Tree. |
| |
| In 2005, when PowerPC Linux began a major cleanup and to merge 32-bit |
| and 64-bit support, the decision was made to require DT support on all |
| powerpc platforms, regardless of whether or not they used Open |
| Firmware. To do this, a DT representation called the Flattened Device |
| Tree (FDT) was created which could be passed to the kernel as a binary |
| blob without requiring a real Open Firmware implementation. U-Boot, |
| kexec, and other bootloaders were modified to support both passing a |
| Device Tree Binary (dtb) and to modify a dtb at boot time. DT was |
| also added to the PowerPC boot wrapper (``arch/powerpc/boot/*``) so that |
| a dtb could be wrapped up with the kernel image to support booting |
| existing non-DT aware firmware. |
| |
| Some time later, FDT infrastructure was generalized to be usable by |
| all architectures. At the time of this writing, 6 mainlined |
| architectures (arm, microblaze, mips, powerpc, sparc, and x86) and 1 |
| out of mainline (nios) have some level of DT support. |
| |
| 2. Data Model |
| ------------- |
| If you haven't already read the Device Tree Usage\ [1]_ page, |
| then go read it now. It's okay, I'll wait.... |
| |
| 2.1 High Level View |
| ------------------- |
| The most important thing to understand is that the DT is simply a data |
| structure that describes the hardware. There is nothing magical about |
| it, and it doesn't magically make all hardware configuration problems |
| go away. What it does do is provide a language for decoupling the |
| hardware configuration from the board and device driver support in the |
| Linux kernel (or any other operating system for that matter). Using |
| it allows board and device support to become data driven; to make |
| setup decisions based on data passed into the kernel instead of on |
| per-machine hard coded selections. |
| |
| Ideally, data driven platform setup should result in less code |
| duplication and make it easier to support a wide range of hardware |
| with a single kernel image. |
| |
| Linux uses DT data for three major purposes: |
| |
| 1) platform identification, |
| 2) runtime configuration, and |
| 3) device population. |
| |
| 2.2 Platform Identification |
| --------------------------- |
| First and foremost, the kernel will use data in the DT to identify the |
| specific machine. In a perfect world, the specific platform shouldn't |
| matter to the kernel because all platform details would be described |
| perfectly by the device tree in a consistent and reliable manner. |
| Hardware is not perfect though, and so the kernel must identify the |
| machine during early boot so that it has the opportunity to run |
| machine-specific fixups. |
| |
| In the majority of cases, the machine identity is irrelevant, and the |
| kernel will instead select setup code based on the machine's core |
| CPU or SoC. On ARM for example, setup_arch() in |
| arch/arm/kernel/setup.c will call setup_machine_fdt() in |
| arch/arm/kernel/devtree.c which searches through the machine_desc |
| table and selects the machine_desc which best matches the device tree |
| data. It determines the best match by looking at the 'compatible' |
| property in the root device tree node, and comparing it with the |
| dt_compat list in struct machine_desc (which is defined in |
| arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h if you're curious). |
| |
| The 'compatible' property contains a sorted list of strings starting |
| with the exact name of the machine, followed by an optional list of |
| boards it is compatible with sorted from most compatible to least. For |
| example, the root compatible properties for the TI BeagleBoard and its |
| successor, the BeagleBoard xM board might look like, respectively:: |
| |
| compatible = "ti,omap3-beagleboard", "ti,omap3450", "ti,omap3"; |
| compatible = "ti,omap3-beagleboard-xm", "ti,omap3450", "ti,omap3"; |
| |
| Where "ti,omap3-beagleboard-xm" specifies the exact model, it also |
| claims that it compatible with the OMAP 3450 SoC, and the omap3 family |
| of SoCs in general. You'll notice that the list is sorted from most |
| specific (exact board) to least specific (SoC family). |
| |
| Astute readers might point out that the Beagle xM could also claim |
| compatibility with the original Beagle board. However, one should be |
| cautioned about doing so at the board level since there is typically a |
| high level of change from one board to another, even within the same |
| product line, and it is hard to nail down exactly what is meant when one |
| board claims to be compatible with another. For the top level, it is |
| better to err on the side of caution and not claim one board is |
| compatible with another. The notable exception would be when one |
| board is a carrier for another, such as a CPU module attached to a |
| carrier board. |
| |
| One more note on compatible values. Any string used in a compatible |
| property must be documented as to what it indicates. Add |
| documentation for compatible strings in Documentation/devicetree/bindings. |
| |
| Again on ARM, for each machine_desc, the kernel looks to see if |
| any of the dt_compat list entries appear in the compatible property. |
| If one does, then that machine_desc is a candidate for driving the |
| machine. After searching the entire table of machine_descs, |
| setup_machine_fdt() returns the 'most compatible' machine_desc based |
| on which entry in the compatible property each machine_desc matches |
| against. If no matching machine_desc is found, then it returns NULL. |
| |
| The reasoning behind this scheme is the observation that in the majority |
| of cases, a single machine_desc can support a large number of boards |
| if they all use the same SoC, or same family of SoCs. However, |
| invariably there will be some exceptions where a specific board will |
| require special setup code that is not useful in the generic case. |
| Special cases could be handled by explicitly checking for the |
| troublesome board(s) in generic setup code, but doing so very quickly |
| becomes ugly and/or unmaintainable if it is more than just a couple of |
| cases. |
| |
| Instead, the compatible list allows a generic machine_desc to provide |
| support for a wide common set of boards by specifying "less |
| compatible" values in the dt_compat list. In the example above, |
| generic board support can claim compatibility with "ti,omap3" or |
| "ti,omap3450". If a bug was discovered on the original beagleboard |
| that required special workaround code during early boot, then a new |
| machine_desc could be added which implements the workarounds and only |
| matches on "ti,omap3-beagleboard". |
| |
| PowerPC uses a slightly different scheme where it calls the .probe() |
| hook from each machine_desc, and the first one returning TRUE is used. |
| However, this approach does not take into account the priority of the |
| compatible list, and probably should be avoided for new architecture |
| support. |
| |
| 2.3 Runtime configuration |
| ------------------------- |
| In most cases, a DT will be the sole method of communicating data from |
| firmware to the kernel, so also gets used to pass in runtime and |
| configuration data like the kernel parameters string and the location |
| of an initrd image. |
| |
| Most of this data is contained in the /chosen node, and when booting |
| Linux it will look something like this:: |
| |
| chosen { |
| bootargs = "console=ttyS0,115200 loglevel=8"; |
| initrd-start = <0xc8000000>; |
| initrd-end = <0xc8200000>; |
| }; |
| |
| The bootargs property contains the kernel arguments, and the initrd-* |
| properties define the address and size of an initrd blob. Note that |
| initrd-end is the first address after the initrd image, so this doesn't |
| match the usual semantic of struct resource. The chosen node may also |
| optionally contain an arbitrary number of additional properties for |
| platform-specific configuration data. |
| |
| During early boot, the architecture setup code calls of_scan_flat_dt() |
| several times with different helper callbacks to parse device tree |
| data before paging is setup. The of_scan_flat_dt() code scans through |
| the device tree and uses the helpers to extract information required |
| during early boot. Typically the early_init_dt_scan_chosen() helper |
| is used to parse the chosen node including kernel parameters, |
| early_init_dt_scan_root() to initialize the DT address space model, |
| and early_init_dt_scan_memory() to determine the size and |
| location of usable RAM. |
| |
| On ARM, the function setup_machine_fdt() is responsible for early |
| scanning of the device tree after selecting the correct machine_desc |
| that supports the board. |
| |
| 2.4 Device population |
| --------------------- |
| After the board has been identified, and after the early configuration data |
| has been parsed, then kernel initialization can proceed in the normal |
| way. At some point in this process, unflatten_device_tree() is called |
| to convert the data into a more efficient runtime representation. |
| This is also when machine-specific setup hooks will get called, like |
| the machine_desc .init_early(), .init_irq() and .init_machine() hooks |
| on ARM. The remainder of this section uses examples from the ARM |
| implementation, but all architectures will do pretty much the same |
| thing when using a DT. |
| |
| As can be guessed by the names, .init_early() is used for any machine- |
| specific setup that needs to be executed early in the boot process, |
| and .init_irq() is used to set up interrupt handling. Using a DT |
| doesn't materially change the behaviour of either of these functions. |
| If a DT is provided, then both .init_early() and .init_irq() are able |
| to call any of the DT query functions (of_* in include/linux/of*.h) to |
| get additional data about the platform. |
| |
| The most interesting hook in the DT context is .init_machine() which |
| is primarily responsible for populating the Linux device model with |
| data about the platform. Historically this has been implemented on |
| embedded platforms by defining a set of static clock structures, |
| platform_devices, and other data in the board support .c file, and |
| registering it en-masse in .init_machine(). When DT is used, then |
| instead of hard coding static devices for each platform, the list of |
| devices can be obtained by parsing the DT, and allocating device |
| structures dynamically. |
| |
| The simplest case is when .init_machine() is only responsible for |
| registering a block of platform_devices. A platform_device is a concept |
| used by Linux for memory or I/O mapped devices which cannot be detected |
| by hardware, and for 'composite' or 'virtual' devices (more on those |
| later). While there is no 'platform device' terminology for the DT, |
| platform devices roughly correspond to device nodes at the root of the |
| tree and children of simple memory mapped bus nodes. |
| |
| About now is a good time to lay out an example. Here is part of the |
| device tree for the NVIDIA Tegra board:: |
| |
| /{ |
| compatible = "nvidia,harmony", "nvidia,tegra20"; |
| #address-cells = <1>; |
| #size-cells = <1>; |
| interrupt-parent = <&intc>; |
| |
| chosen { }; |
| aliases { }; |
| |
| memory { |
| device_type = "memory"; |
| reg = <0x00000000 0x40000000>; |
| }; |
| |
| soc { |
| compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-soc", "simple-bus"; |
| #address-cells = <1>; |
| #size-cells = <1>; |
| ranges; |
| |
| intc: interrupt-controller@50041000 { |
| compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-gic"; |
| interrupt-controller; |
| #interrupt-cells = <1>; |
| reg = <0x50041000 0x1000>, < 0x50040100 0x0100 >; |
| }; |
| |
| serial@70006300 { |
| compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-uart"; |
| reg = <0x70006300 0x100>; |
| interrupts = <122>; |
| }; |
| |
| i2s1: i2s@70002800 { |
| compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-i2s"; |
| reg = <0x70002800 0x100>; |
| interrupts = <77>; |
| codec = <&wm8903>; |
| }; |
| |
| i2c@7000c000 { |
| compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-i2c"; |
| #address-cells = <1>; |
| #size-cells = <0>; |
| reg = <0x7000c000 0x100>; |
| interrupts = <70>; |
| |
| wm8903: codec@1a { |
| compatible = "wlf,wm8903"; |
| reg = <0x1a>; |
| interrupts = <347>; |
| }; |
| }; |
| }; |
| |
| sound { |
| compatible = "nvidia,harmony-sound"; |
| i2s-controller = <&i2s1>; |
| i2s-codec = <&wm8903>; |
| }; |
| }; |
| |
| At .init_machine() time, Tegra board support code will need to look at |
| this DT and decide which nodes to create platform_devices for. |
| However, looking at the tree, it is not immediately obvious what kind |
| of device each node represents, or even if a node represents a device |
| at all. The /chosen, /aliases, and /memory nodes are informational |
| nodes that don't describe devices (although arguably memory could be |
| considered a device). The children of the /soc node are memory mapped |
| devices, but the codec@1a is an i2c device, and the sound node |
| represents not a device, but rather how other devices are connected |
| together to create the audio subsystem. I know what each device is |
| because I'm familiar with the board design, but how does the kernel |
| know what to do with each node? |
| |
| The trick is that the kernel starts at the root of the tree and looks |
| for nodes that have a 'compatible' property. First, it is generally |
| assumed that any node with a 'compatible' property represents a device |
| of some kind, and second, it can be assumed that any node at the root |
| of the tree is either directly attached to the processor bus, or is a |
| miscellaneous system device that cannot be described any other way. |
| For each of these nodes, Linux allocates and registers a |
| platform_device, which in turn may get bound to a platform_driver. |
| |
| Why is using a platform_device for these nodes a safe assumption? |
| Well, for the way that Linux models devices, just about all bus_types |
| assume that its devices are children of a bus controller. For |
| example, each i2c_client is a child of an i2c_master. Each spi_device |
| is a child of an SPI bus. Similarly for USB, PCI, MDIO, etc. The |
| same hierarchy is also found in the DT, where I2C device nodes only |
| ever appear as children of an I2C bus node. Ditto for SPI, MDIO, USB, |
| etc. The only devices which do not require a specific type of parent |
| device are platform_devices (and amba_devices, but more on that |
| later), which will happily live at the base of the Linux /sys/devices |
| tree. Therefore, if a DT node is at the root of the tree, then it |
| really probably is best registered as a platform_device. |
| |
| Linux board support code calls of_platform_populate(NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) |
| to kick off discovery of devices at the root of the tree. The |
| parameters are all NULL because when starting from the root of the |
| tree, there is no need to provide a starting node (the first NULL), a |
| parent struct device (the last NULL), and we're not using a match |
| table (yet). For a board that only needs to register devices, |
| .init_machine() can be completely empty except for the |
| of_platform_populate() call. |
| |
| In the Tegra example, this accounts for the /soc and /sound nodes, but |
| what about the children of the SoC node? Shouldn't they be registered |
| as platform devices too? For Linux DT support, the generic behaviour |
| is for child devices to be registered by the parent's device driver at |
| driver .probe() time. So, an i2c bus device driver will register a |
| i2c_client for each child node, an SPI bus driver will register |
| its spi_device children, and similarly for other bus_types. |
| According to that model, a driver could be written that binds to the |
| SoC node and simply registers platform_devices for each of its |
| children. The board support code would allocate and register an SoC |
| device, a (theoretical) SoC device driver could bind to the SoC device, |
| and register platform_devices for /soc/interrupt-controller, /soc/serial, |
| /soc/i2s, and /soc/i2c in its .probe() hook. Easy, right? |
| |
| Actually, it turns out that registering children of some |
| platform_devices as more platform_devices is a common pattern, and the |
| device tree support code reflects that and makes the above example |
| simpler. The second argument to of_platform_populate() is an |
| of_device_id table, and any node that matches an entry in that table |
| will also get its child nodes registered. In the Tegra case, the code |
| can look something like this:: |
| |
| static void __init harmony_init_machine(void) |
| { |
| /* ... */ |
| of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL); |
| } |
| |
| "simple-bus" is defined in the Devicetree Specification as a property |
| meaning a simple memory mapped bus, so the of_platform_populate() code |
| could be written to just assume simple-bus compatible nodes will |
| always be traversed. However, we pass it in as an argument so that |
| board support code can always override the default behaviour. |
| |
| [Need to add discussion of adding i2c/spi/etc child devices] |
| |
| Appendix A: AMBA devices |
| ------------------------ |
| |
| ARM Primecells are a certain kind of device attached to the ARM AMBA |
| bus which include some support for hardware detection and power |
| management. In Linux, struct amba_device and the amba_bus_type is |
| used to represent Primecell devices. However, the fiddly bit is that |
| not all devices on an AMBA bus are Primecells, and for Linux it is |
| typical for both amba_device and platform_device instances to be |
| siblings of the same bus segment. |
| |
| When using the DT, this creates problems for of_platform_populate() |
| because it must decide whether to register each node as either a |
| platform_device or an amba_device. This unfortunately complicates the |
| device creation model a little bit, but the solution turns out not to |
| be too invasive. If a node is compatible with "arm,primecell", then |
| of_platform_populate() will register it as an amba_device instead of a |
| platform_device. |