From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2861BC49EA6 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:07:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 099AA613C9 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:07:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232600AbhFXVKE (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 17:10:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50760 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232460AbhFXVKE (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 17:10:04 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32e.google.com (mail-ot1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 316F4C061574 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:07:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id d21-20020a9d72d50000b02904604cda7e66so5299569otk.7 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:07:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=sJrAfnbd4tXYhg+eyY3eUSRy6f41j1Q+kBv+kRbkjzE=; b=ytyqOEjb4ctlF/MpHvW+BprgoYP73U0Mif57mp7hKltSRqruZigxkRGsQoRmdL36C7 EXAkbGJddUE3U5qtGJJj/837gCk1nrNmHOMGEeOAhX15kjl+MJhY9hhwUeGfLrqFZAfy Y9iWiqcTABSWdo77m+cqNpJ/9bM8f86dsIhwquxrps9WWNhZVm91wWBlik6BkaRqYjdv 3bcYd+Otw+B3xFR3dRJOTrcCsMvguBYsn4wqTv9u60cvUmGGgrNMEQnV7bDL3OaZrqfw 482flSOMB/I/sXRJg7ZyQp0awdHMGc2rh8smJtES97zoiW9WsKK/EPEoCKREwIjTQtlM rchQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=sJrAfnbd4tXYhg+eyY3eUSRy6f41j1Q+kBv+kRbkjzE=; b=MHJS1cdFLioSMm41AfNIN70ZyVcjEmtx1Ig4qlw82nJI9Y6Zbkw2lGWvoGe0LMrF4E sZPHmXhs75rUUNqWRNjXbLzZc2uCRP+OKVYUodlHpsxFvc3HjpKNs8TuK4AyfJz+Nvl8 oa+8HkNZ6oy2+rjza38TNjG+mf9nHY17QhPF1ES1siUOgZmuPyDPdYn8anZJFDNULIXF yluF2jZrSSVtmcxAtnGODPMtwUa4ehY7Ekvy85Iwzfm46aYf6hSR6muBx/KG7lRCFk2C uKcV+o0f/yzg/IYxZ6WCjJRH/s13JnE+/Xj6nFEjYpL7TjuVW7LwkQIUeW9VJDxhFRm5 u6aQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Wf2dDTuQ1S+NtRM9COZ+FhWzjo8B4+pyqYFhf0pUxJYDmTw8T t9muMF04qZFUrFrNf7hxD/pynw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzoDTY3KLWKj2K+bgawrZvXlpKGDfQa/BRvZ6kkq3TT+lzFsHHPUdXWxSyGIjqdpGqKayobsg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:12d2:: with SMTP id a18mr6444021otq.203.1624568863357; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:07:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yoga (104-57-184-186.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [104.57.184.186]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h7sm953661ots.44.2021.06.24.14.07.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:07:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 16:07:40 -0500 From: Bjorn Andersson To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno Cc: Jassi Brar , Rob Herring , Martin Botka , ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht, Konrad Dybcio , Marijn Suijten , jamipkettunen@somainline.org, Andy Gross , linux-arm-msm , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] mailbox: qcom-apcs: Add SM6125 compatible Message-ID: References: <9aae3092-2e2b-9261-f4e7-864b873eb2d4@somainline.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9aae3092-2e2b-9261-f4e7-864b873eb2d4@somainline.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Tue 22 Jun 09:36 CDT 2021, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 22/06/21 05:52, Bjorn Andersson ha scritto: > > On Mon 21 Jun 22:34 CDT 2021, Jassi Brar wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 9:27 PM Bjorn Andersson > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon 21 Jun 20:00 CDT 2021, Jassi Brar wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 6:35 PM Bjorn Andersson > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon 21 Jun 18:19 CDT 2021, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 5:10 PM Jassi Brar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 2:46 PM Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 10:03 PM Jassi Brar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 4:46 AM Martin Botka > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit adds compatible for the SM6125 SoC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Botka > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > Changes in V2: > > > > > > > > > > > None > > > > > > > > > > > Changes in V3: > > > > > > > > > > > Change compatible to apcs-hmss-global > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c | 5 +++++ > > > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c > > > > > > > > > > > index f25324d03842..f24c5ad8d658 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -57,6 +57,10 @@ static const struct qcom_apcs_ipc_data sdm660_apcs_data = { > > > > > > > > > > > .offset = 8, .clk_name = NULL > > > > > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +static const struct qcom_apcs_ipc_data sm6125_apcs_data = { > > > > > > > > > > > + .offset = 8, .clk_name = NULL > > > > > > > > > > > +}; > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > static const struct qcom_apcs_ipc_data apps_shared_apcs_data = { > > > > > > > > > > > .offset = 12, .clk_name = NULL > > > > > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -166,6 +170,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_apcs_ipc_of_match[] = { > > > > > > > > > > > { .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-apss-shared", .data = &apps_shared_apcs_data }, > > > > > > > > > > > { .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-apcs-hmss-global", .data = &sdm660_apcs_data }, > > > > > > > > > > > { .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-apss-shared", .data = &apps_shared_apcs_data }, > > > > > > > > > > > + { .compatible = "qcom,sm6125-apcs-hmss-global", .data = &sm6125_apcs_data }, > > > > > > > > > > > { .compatible = "qcom,sm8150-apss-shared", .data = &apps_shared_apcs_data }, > > > > > > > > > > > { .compatible = "qcom,sdx55-apcs-gcc", .data = &sdx55_apcs_data }, > > > > > > > > > > > {} > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > These all are basically different names for the same controller. > > > > > > > > > > The 'offset' is a configuration parameter and the 'clock', when NULL, > > > > > > > > > > is basically some "always-on" clock. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure we wouldn't be doing it, if the controller was third-party. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If newer implementations are 'the same', then they should have a > > > > > > > > > fallback compatible to the existing one that is the same and no driver > > > > > > > > > change is needed. If the differences are board or instance (within an > > > > > > > > > SoC) specific, then a DT property would be appropriate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The controllers (13 now) only differ by the 'offset' where the > > > > > > > > registers are mapped. Clock-name is a pure s/w artifact. > > > > > > > > So, maybe we could push all these in DT. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why is 'reg' not used for the offset? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The DT node and its "reg" describes the whole IP block. > > > > > > > > > > > > The particular register that we care of has, as you can see, moved > > > > > > around during the various platforms and some incarnations of this IP > > > > > > block provides controls for CPU-related clocks as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > We can certainly have the multiple compatible points to the same > > > > > > apcs_data, but I'm not able to spot a reasonable "catch-all compatible" > > > > > > given that I don't see any natural groupings. > > > > > > > > > > > Any platform that comes later may reuse the already available compatible. > > > > > For example drop this patch and reuse "qcom,sdm660-apcs-hmss-global" ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem is that this would change the meaning of > > > > "qcom,sdm660-apcs-hmss-global" from meaning "The apcs hmss global block > > > > _in_ sdm660" to "any random apcs block with the mailbox register at > > > > offset 8". > > > > > > > To me, the deeper problem seems to be naming a controller "The apcs > > > hmss global block _in_ sdm660" just because the h/w manual hasn't > > > given a name to it. But that is okay too, if we name the subsequent > > > controllers as "the same as one in sdm660" and provide the h/w > > > configuration 'offset' via a DT property. > > > > > > > As I said, I'd need to dig through the hardware documentation for the > > various platforms to see if I can find what the common denominators are. > > We've always seen this as "the apcs hmss global block _in_ ". > > > > > > > > > In any case, we can't really get rid of the first 13 instances though... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right, we have the problem that we have DTBs out there that relies on > > > > > > these compatibles, but as Jassi requests we'd have to start describing > > > > > > the internal register layout in DT - which this binding purposefully > > > > > > avoids. > > > > > > > > > > > Not these strings, but 'offset' and 'clock-name' as optional > > > > > properties that new platforms can use. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Relying on completely generic compatibles to match the driver and then > > > > distinguish each platform using additional properties is exactly what > > > > Qualcomm does downstream. The community has clarified countless times > > > > that this is not the way to write DT bindings. > > > > > > > Yes, and I don't suggest it otherwise. For h/w quirks and > > > extra/missing features, it does make sense to have different > > > compatibles. > > > > > > > But what you're suggesting assumes that they are the same and that we're > > done implementing all the software for this block. The platform specific > > compatible allows us to postpone that question. > > > > > However, for _trivial_ variations let us get that value from DT. > > > 'offset' is anyway a h/w property. > > > That way we won't be distinguishing platforms using dt properties, but > > > only support different platforms seamlessly. > > > > > > > As I said previously, this goes against the direction provided by the DT > > maintainers. If a property is platform specific this should be expressed > > by the compatible. > > > > > On second thought, we have grown from 2 to 13 aliases in 4 yrs. I only > > > have to ignore 3 times/annum to lead a peaceful life ;) > > > > > > > True, but I'll try to find some time to see if we have some reuse of the > > IP block to allow us to use some generic compatible. > > > > We'd still need a patch in the DT binding for every single platform, but > > we should be able to avoid the compatible additions in the driver. > > > > Hello Jassi, Bjorn > > I've read the entire thread and I can't say that Jassi is entirely wrong > but I also agree with Bjorn on this matter. > > This driver is here to "simply" manage the register offset in the APCS > IP, which is a pretty straightforward operation. > If you check in this driver, you will see that there's not much > duplication between the various qcom_apcs_ipc_data that we have for > all the different SoCs. > > Checking further, we can effectively reduce the amount of compatibles > in this driver by simply removing some "duplicated" instances and in > particular: > ipq6018, ipq8074, msm8916, msm8994, msm8998, sdm660 > > and eventually replacing them with either of: > - 8bits_apcs_data qcom,apcs-apps-global-8bit > qcom,apcs-kpss-global-8bit I don't like those compatibles, simply because the binding is supposed to describe the hardware block, not the fact that Linux _currently_ only pokes this one register. We could probably "qcom,apss-global" as a catch-all for at least sc7180, sc7280, sdm845, sm8150, sm8250 and sm8350. But look at 8996 and 8998, both named "something-hmss-something", with different register layout. And a quick glance seems to indicate that sdm660 isn't a hmss after all :/ But introducing qcom,apss-global should catch a bunch of the newer platforms. On the DT binding side we still need the platform-specific ones and we need each one to be added to the binding regardless of the catch-all in the driver. Regards, Bjorn > - more_appropriate_name_apcs_data qcom,(...blah) > > This would mean that we would have to use a generic "qcom,apcs-clk" as > the clk_name, but no other modifications would be done, apart checking > the return value to choose whether to print or not the dev_err when the > clock name is specified but not present in dt, since the driver is > already actually covering this case. > > That would make us able to reduce the compatibles from 6 to 2, relative > to the aforementioned SoC specific bindings. > I'm positive that, through time, when new SoCs arrive, we would avoid > getting this compatible list to be megabytes long... > > Right now it's not an issue, but since Qualcomm SoCs are now being very > actively upstreamed, I can see this coming in the future, somehow. > > > Of course this means that we're getting some fair amount of patch-noise > in the mailing lists, since all qcom dtsi files will have to be changed, > but that shouldn't really be a problem, I guess. > > I'm sure that I'm not the only one with such a "wow-idea" in mind :) > > Yours, > - Angelo > > > Regards, > > Bjorn > > >