Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: interconnect: Add rpmh virt devices

From: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
	Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	Georgi Djakov <djakov@kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>
Cc: Odelu Kukatla <quic_okukatla@quicinc.com>,
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: interconnect: Add rpmh virt devices
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:25:58 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e538affc-5c43-9b40-f6c7-2ceb2fa2fec8@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <333a240a-2c97-8b19-91d1-315d00e1f438@linaro.org>

On 11/24/2022 2:30 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/11/2022 18:57, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +maintainers:
>>>>>> +  - Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@linaro.org>
>>>>>> +  - Odelu Kukatla <quic_okukatla@quicinc.com>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +description: |
>>>>>> +   RPMh interconnect providers support system bandwidth requirements through
>>>>>> +   RPMh hardware accelerators known as Bus Clock Manager (BCM). The provider is
>>>>>> +   able to communicate with the BCM through the Resource State Coordinator (RSC)
>>>>>> +   associated with each execution environment. Provider nodes must point to at
>>>>>> +   least one RPMh device child node pertaining to their RSC and each provider
>>>>>> +   can map to multiple RPMh resources. Virtual interconnect providers are not
>>>>>> +   controlled by AP and do not support QoS; they should not have associated
>>>>>> +   register regions.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +allOf:
>>>>>> +  - $ref: qcom,rpmh-common.yaml#
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +properties:
>>>>>> +  compatible:
>>>>>> +    enum:
>>>>>> +      - qcom,qdu1000-clk-virt
>>>>>> +      - qcom,qdu1000-mc-virt
>>>>>> +      - qcom,sm8450-clk-virt
>>>>>> +      - qcom,sm8450-mc-virt
>>>>> You should also move qcom,sdx65-mc-virt, qcom,sc8280xp-mc-virt,
>>>>> qcom,sc8280xp-clk-virt and more.
>>>> Ok. I wasn't sure since some of these entries don't seem to conform to
>>>> these bindings, even though it seems they should.
>>> I have impression that devices I listed conform to these bindings, this
>>> is why I listed them. But if you are sure that they do not, then they
>>> should not be moved.
>> You're correct; those you listed do conform to the new bindings and should be moved.
>> I also caught qcom,sc7280-clk-virt which needs to be moved. I'll add to the new bindings.
> Actually let's wait a bit with this. For SM8550 we had an idea to move
> interconnect to their own bindings file, because they will grow a bit
> with allOf:if:then clauses.
>
> Maybe SM8450 and QDU1000 should also go to their own files which will
> describe all their interconnects (the virt and the ones requiring clocks)?
>
> Apologies for bringing it late for your patches, but SM8550 is also
> happening right now, so new things pop-up :)

Yeah no worries. I can definitely make this change; if this is how we want to do
things going forward I'm happy to oblige.

Thanks,
Melody
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>