| Message ID | 20230314080917.68246-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | mailbox/arm64/ qcom: rework compatibles for fallback | expand |
On 14/03/2023 13:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 14/03/2023 10:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Changes since v1 >> ================ >> 1. Rebase >> 2. Make msm8994 fallback for several variants, not msm8953, because the latter >> actually might take some clocks. > > Although the approach looks correct, I think that in some cases it tries > to mark devices compatible judging from the current driver, not from the > hardware itself. Which is what compatibility is about... > > For the reference, on msm8994 the apcs is a clock controller for the l2 > clocks (which we do not support yet). If I'm not mistaken, on msm8976 > the apcs region contains a mux for the cluster1 clocks. On sdm630/660 > the apcs region also seems to be involved in CPU clocks scaling. The question is this means they are incompatible? > > On the other hand, the sc7180/sm8150 part seems logical. > Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 09:09:05AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > SDX55 and SDX65 DTS takes clocks in a bit different order. Adjust > bindings to the DTS. > Fixes: ? > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > index d888ead09282..2992227631c4 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > @@ -97,14 +97,14 @@ allOf: > properties: > clocks: > items: > + - description: reference clock > - description: primary pll parent of the clock driver > - description: auxiliary parent > - - description: reference clock > clock-names: > items: > + - const: ref > - const: pll > - const: aux > - - const: ref > - if: > properties: > compatible: > -- > 2.34.1 >
On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 09:09:06 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > The qcom,sdx55-apcs-gcc is followed by another compatible (syscon), thus > the 'if' clause must match by contains. > > Fixes: 0d17014e9189 ("dt-bindings: mailbox: Add binding for SDX55 APCS") > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 09:09:05AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > SDX55 and SDX65 DTS takes clocks in a bit different order. Adjust > bindings to the DTS. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Acked-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org> Thanks, Mani > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > index d888ead09282..2992227631c4 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > @@ -97,14 +97,14 @@ allOf: > properties: > clocks: > items: > + - description: reference clock > - description: primary pll parent of the clock driver > - description: auxiliary parent > - - description: reference clock > clock-names: > items: > + - const: ref > - const: pll > - const: aux > - - const: ref > - if: > properties: > compatible: > -- > 2.34.1 >
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 09:09:06AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > The qcom,sdx55-apcs-gcc is followed by another compatible (syscon), thus > the 'if' clause must match by contains. > > Fixes: 0d17014e9189 ("dt-bindings: mailbox: Add binding for SDX55 APCS") > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Acked-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org> Thanks, Mani > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > index 2992227631c4..4d2f408a5efb 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,apcs-kpss-global.yaml > @@ -91,8 +91,9 @@ allOf: > - if: > properties: > compatible: > - enum: > - - qcom,sdx55-apcs-gcc > + contains: > + enum: > + - qcom,sdx55-apcs-gcc > then: > properties: > clocks: > -- > 2.34.1 >
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 at 19:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 16/03/2023 07:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 14/03/2023 13:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> On 14/03/2023 10:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Changes since v1 > >>> ================ > >>> 1. Rebase > >>> 2. Make msm8994 fallback for several variants, not msm8953, because the latter > >>> actually might take some clocks. > >> > >> Although the approach looks correct, I think that in some cases it tries > >> to mark devices compatible judging from the current driver, not from the > >> hardware itself. > > > > Which is what compatibility is about... Well, I was trying to say that once we update the driver, the devices will not be compatible. But probably our definitions of being compatible differ. > > > >> > >> For the reference, on msm8994 the apcs is a clock controller for the l2 > >> clocks (which we do not support yet). If I'm not mistaken, on msm8976 > >> the apcs region contains a mux for the cluster1 clocks. On sdm630/660 > >> the apcs region also seems to be involved in CPU clocks scaling. > > > > The question is this means they are incompatible? > > Since there are no more comments I assume they are actually compatible > in the terms of SW interface.
On 22/03/2023 23:28, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 at 19:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 16/03/2023 07:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 14/03/2023 13:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>> On 14/03/2023 10:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Changes since v1 >>>>> ================ >>>>> 1. Rebase >>>>> 2. Make msm8994 fallback for several variants, not msm8953, because the latter >>>>> actually might take some clocks. >>>> >>>> Although the approach looks correct, I think that in some cases it tries >>>> to mark devices compatible judging from the current driver, not from the >>>> hardware itself. >>> >>> Which is what compatibility is about... > > Well, I was trying to say that once we update the driver, the devices > will not be compatible. But probably our definitions of being > compatible differ. What do you want to update in the driver? What's going to happen with it? What is missing? Best regards, Krzysztof