diff mbox series

[RFC] dt-bindings: PCI: ti,j721e-pci-host: Add device-id for TI's J784S4 SoC

Message ID 20240108050735.512445-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com
State Superseded
Headers show
Series [RFC] dt-bindings: PCI: ti,j721e-pci-host: Add device-id for TI's J784S4 SoC | expand

Commit Message

Siddharth Vadapalli Jan. 8, 2024, 5:07 a.m. UTC
Add the device-id of 0xb012 for the PCIe controller on the J784S4 SoC as
described in the CTRL_MMR_PCI_DEVICE_ID register's PCI_DEVICE_ID_DEVICE_ID
field. The Register descriptions and the Technical Reference Manual for
J784S4 SoC can be found at: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/spruj52

Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
---

This patch is based on linux-next tagged next-20240105.

Regards,
Siddharth.

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

Comments

Siddharth Vadapalli Jan. 9, 2024, 4:08 a.m. UTC | #1
On 08/01/24 17:56, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 12:34, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is this patch incomplete? What is missing here? What are you asking
>>>>> about as RFC?
>>>>
>>>> Since the merge window is closed, I was hoping to get the patch reviewed in
>>>> order to get any "Reviewed-by" tags if possible. That way, I will be able to
>>>> post it again as v1 along with the tags when the merge window opens. For that
>>>
>>> This is v1, so that would be v2.
>>>
>>>> reason, I have marked it as an RFC patch. Is there an alternative to this "RFC
>>>> patch" method that I have followed? Please let me know.
>>>
>>> Then how does it differ from posting without RFC? Sorry, RFC is
>>> incomplete work. Often ignored during review.
>>
>> I was under the impression that posting patches when the merge window is closed
>> will be met with a "post your patch later when the merge window is open"
>> response. That is why I chose the "RFC patch" path since RFCs can be posted anytime.
>>
>> For the Networking Subsystem, it is documented that patches with new features
>> shouldn't be posted when the merge window is closed. I have mostly posted
>> patches for the Networking Subsystem and am not sure about the rules for the
>> device-tree bindings and PCI Subsystems. To be on the safe side I posted this
>> patch as an RFC patch.
> 
> Ah, so you want to go around that policy by posting non-RFC patch as
> RFC. It does not work like that.

Thank you for clarifying. May I post the v2 of this patch in that case, after
rebasing it on the latest linux-next? I wish to receive feedback or Reviewed-by
tags for the v2 patch and post the v3 accordingly when the merge window opens again.
Rob Herring Jan. 13, 2024, 1:45 a.m. UTC | #2
On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 10:37:35 +0530, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> Add the device-id of 0xb012 for the PCIe controller on the J784S4 SoC as
> described in the CTRL_MMR_PCI_DEVICE_ID register's PCI_DEVICE_ID_DEVICE_ID
> field. The Register descriptions and the Technical Reference Manual for
> J784S4 SoC can be found at: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/spruj52
> 
> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
> ---
> 
> This patch is based on linux-next tagged next-20240105.
> 
> Regards,
> Siddharth.
> 
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml
index b7a534cef24d..0b1f21570ed0 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/ti,j721e-pci-host.yaml
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@  properties:
       - 0xb00d
       - 0xb00f
       - 0xb010
+      - 0xb012
       - 0xb013
 
   msi-map: true