Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] arm: dts: ti: Add device tree support for PRU-ICSS on AM335x

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/03/2026 13:00, Parvathi Pudi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> Parvathi Pudi <parvathi@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> From: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>
>>>
>>> The TI Sitara AM335x ICE-V2 consists of single PRU-ICSS instance,
>>> This patch adds the new device tree overlay file in-order to enable
>>> PRU-ICSS instance, along with makefile changes.
>>>
>>> PRU-ICSS instance consists of two PRU cores along with various
>>> peripherals such as the Interrupt Controller (PRU_INTC), the Industrial
>>> Ethernet Peripheral(IEP), the Real Time Media Independent Interface
>>> controller (MII_RT), and the Enhanced Capture (eCAP) event module.
>>>
>>> am33xx-l4.dtsi - Adds IEP and eCAP peripheral as child nodes
>>> of the PRUSS subsystem node.
>>>
>>> am335x-icev2-prueth.dtso - Adds PRU-ICSS instance node along with PRU
>>> eth port information and corresponding port configuration. It includes
>>> interrupt mapping for packet reception, HW timestamp collection, and PRU
>>> Ethernet ports in MII mode,
>>>
>>> GPIO configuration, boot strapping along with delay configuration for
>>> individual PRU Ethernet port and other required nodes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew F. Davis <afd@xxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@xxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Basharath Hussain Khaja <basharath@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Parvathi Pudi <parvathi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * Disable CPSW switch node and
>>> + * MDIO configuration to prevent
>>> + * conflict with PRU-ICSS
>>> + */
>>> +&mac_sw {
>>> +        status = "disable";
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +&davinci_mdio_sw {
>>> +        status = "disable";
>>> +};
>>
>> I think you need s/disable/disabled/?  (note the trailing 'd').  Without
>> that, I don't think you're disabling these nodes, so I'm curious how it
>> is not conflicting with the PRU-ICSS.
>>
>> Kevin
> 
> Thank you for pointing out this typo.
> 
> We checked the kernel code as to why this did not create any issue in our
> testing.  We found that the device availability check goes through
> of_device_is_available(), which only treats "ok" or "okay" as enabled.
> Anything else is effectively treated as not enabled.
> 
> So even though "disable" isn't the usual DT value, it still prevents the
> node from being probed since it doesn't match "ok"/"okay".


The question is whether you build tested your code (so dtbs_check). And
if not, why?

Best regards,
Krzysztof