* [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
@ 2021-02-16 11:12 Vinod Koul
2021-02-17 4:49 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-02-18 16:11 ` Bjorn Andersson
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Vinod Koul @ 2021-02-16 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: linux-arm-msm, Bjorn Andersson, Vinod Koul, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
specific compatible for SoCs
Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
@@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
- compatible
Usage: required
Value type: <string>
- Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
+ Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
+ along with SoC specific compatible:
+ "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
- clocks
Usage: required
--
2.26.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-02-16 11:12 [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible Vinod Koul
@ 2021-02-17 4:49 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-02-18 12:44 ` Vinod Koul
2021-02-18 16:11 ` Bjorn Andersson
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2021-02-17 4:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vinod Koul
Cc: linux-arm-msm, Bjorn Andersson, Rafael J. Wysocki, Rob Herring,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On 16-02-21, 16:42, Vinod Koul wrote:
> Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> specific compatible for SoCs
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> - compatible
> Usage: required
> Value type: <string>
> - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> + along with SoC specific compatible:
> + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
And why is SoC specific compatible required here ? Is the implementation on
sm8350 any different than the ones using "qcom,cpufreq-epss" compatible ?
FWIW, the same compatible string must be reused until the time there is
difference in the hardware. The compatible string must be considered as a marker
for a particular version of the hardware.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-02-17 4:49 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2021-02-18 12:44 ` Vinod Koul
2021-02-18 15:48 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Vinod Koul @ 2021-02-18 12:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: linux-arm-msm, Bjorn Andersson, Rafael J. Wysocki, Rob Herring,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On 17-02-21, 10:19, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 16-02-21, 16:42, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> > specific compatible for SoCs
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> > - compatible
> > Usage: required
> > Value type: <string>
> > - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> > + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > + along with SoC specific compatible:
> > + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
>
> And why is SoC specific compatible required here ? Is the implementation on
> sm8350 any different than the ones using "qcom,cpufreq-epss" compatible ?
>
> FWIW, the same compatible string must be reused until the time there is
> difference in the hardware. The compatible string must be considered as a marker
> for a particular version of the hardware.
Rob has indicated that we should use a SoC specific compatible and I
agree with that. We are using both soc and generic one here and driver
will be loaded for generic one.
Thanks
--
~Vinod
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-02-18 12:44 ` Vinod Koul
@ 2021-02-18 15:48 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-03-05 21:57 ` Rob Herring
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2021-02-18 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vinod Koul
Cc: linux-arm-msm, Bjorn Andersson, Rafael J. Wysocki, Rob Herring,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On 18-02-21, 18:14, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 17-02-21, 10:19, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 16-02-21, 16:42, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> > > specific compatible for SoCs
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> > > - compatible
> > > Usage: required
> > > Value type: <string>
> > > - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> > > + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > > + along with SoC specific compatible:
> > > + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> >
> > And why is SoC specific compatible required here ? Is the implementation on
> > sm8350 any different than the ones using "qcom,cpufreq-epss" compatible ?
> >
> > FWIW, the same compatible string must be reused until the time there is
> > difference in the hardware. The compatible string must be considered as a marker
> > for a particular version of the hardware.
>
> Rob has indicated that we should use a SoC specific compatible and I
> agree with that. We are using both soc and generic one here and driver
> will be loaded for generic one.
I am not sure of the context, lets see what Rob has to say on this. I
believe we only need 1 compatible string here (whatever it is), as
this is just one version of the hardware we are talking about. We
already have 2 somehow and you are trying to add one more and I don't
fell good about it. :(
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-02-16 11:12 [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible Vinod Koul
2021-02-17 4:49 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2021-02-18 16:11 ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-02-19 17:59 ` Vinod Koul
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Andersson @ 2021-02-18 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vinod Koul
Cc: Viresh Kumar, linux-arm-msm, Rafael J. Wysocki, Rob Herring,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On Tue 16 Feb 05:12 CST 2021, Vinod Koul wrote:
> Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> specific compatible for SoCs
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> - compatible
> Usage: required
> Value type: <string>
> - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> + along with SoC specific compatible:
> + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
Can you please extend this to add all the platforms that we currently
support?
PS. Didn't we have someone working on converting this to yaml?
Regards,
Bjorn
>
> - clocks
> Usage: required
> --
> 2.26.2
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-02-18 16:11 ` Bjorn Andersson
@ 2021-02-19 17:59 ` Vinod Koul
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Vinod Koul @ 2021-02-19 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjorn Andersson, mani
Cc: Viresh Kumar, linux-arm-msm, Rafael J. Wysocki, Rob Herring,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On 18-02-21, 10:11, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 16 Feb 05:12 CST 2021, Vinod Koul wrote:
>
> > Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> > specific compatible for SoCs
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> > - compatible
> > Usage: required
> > Value type: <string>
> > - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> > + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > + along with SoC specific compatible:
> > + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
>
> Can you please extend this to add all the platforms that we currently
> support?
>
> PS. Didn't we have someone working on converting this to yaml?
Yep, Mani seems to have done that, I will wait for that to get merged
and update this.. Thanks
--
~Vinod
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-02-18 15:48 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2021-03-05 21:57 ` Rob Herring
2021-03-08 4:56 ` Vinod Koul
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Rob Herring @ 2021-03-05 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: Vinod Koul, linux-arm-msm, Bjorn Andersson, Rafael J. Wysocki,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 09:18:20PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 18-02-21, 18:14, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 17-02-21, 10:19, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 16-02-21, 16:42, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> > > > specific compatible for SoCs
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> > > > ---
> > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > > index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > > @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> > > > - compatible
> > > > Usage: required
> > > > Value type: <string>
> > > > - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> > > > + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > > > + along with SoC specific compatible:
> > > > + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > >
> > > And why is SoC specific compatible required here ? Is the implementation on
> > > sm8350 any different than the ones using "qcom,cpufreq-epss" compatible ?
> > >
> > > FWIW, the same compatible string must be reused until the time there is
> > > difference in the hardware. The compatible string must be considered as a marker
> > > for a particular version of the hardware.
> >
> > Rob has indicated that we should use a SoC specific compatible and I
> > agree with that. We are using both soc and generic one here and driver
> > will be loaded for generic one.
>
> I am not sure of the context, lets see what Rob has to say on this. I
> believe we only need 1 compatible string here (whatever it is), as
> this is just one version of the hardware we are talking about. We
> already have 2 somehow and you are trying to add one more and I don't
> fell good about it. :(
The h/w block is the same features and bugs in every single
implementation? If not sure, better be safe.
I don't know that I'd go back and add SoC ones for everything though.
Rob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible
2021-03-05 21:57 ` Rob Herring
@ 2021-03-08 4:56 ` Vinod Koul
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Vinod Koul @ 2021-03-08 4:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rob Herring
Cc: Viresh Kumar, linux-arm-msm, Bjorn Andersson, Rafael J. Wysocki,
linux-pm, devicetree, linux-kernel
On 05-03-21, 15:57, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 09:18:20PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 18-02-21, 18:14, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 17-02-21, 10:19, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > > On 16-02-21, 16:42, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > > Add the CPUfreq compatible for SM8350 SoC along with note for using the
> > > > > specific compatible for SoCs
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt | 4 +++-
> > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > > > index 9299028ee712..3eb3cee59d79 100644
> > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
> > > > > @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Properties:
> > > > > - compatible
> > > > > Usage: required
> > > > > Value type: <string>
> > > > > - Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss".
> > > > > + Definition: must be "qcom,cpufreq-hw" or "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > > > > + along with SoC specific compatible:
> > > > > + "qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss", "qcom,cpufreq-epss"
> > > >
> > > > And why is SoC specific compatible required here ? Is the implementation on
> > > > sm8350 any different than the ones using "qcom,cpufreq-epss" compatible ?
> > > >
> > > > FWIW, the same compatible string must be reused until the time there is
> > > > difference in the hardware. The compatible string must be considered as a marker
> > > > for a particular version of the hardware.
> > >
> > > Rob has indicated that we should use a SoC specific compatible and I
> > > agree with that. We are using both soc and generic one here and driver
> > > will be loaded for generic one.
> >
> > I am not sure of the context, lets see what Rob has to say on this. I
> > believe we only need 1 compatible string here (whatever it is), as
> > this is just one version of the hardware we are talking about. We
> > already have 2 somehow and you are trying to add one more and I don't
> > fell good about it. :(
>
> The h/w block is the same features and bugs in every single
> implementation? If not sure, better be safe.
>
> I don't know that I'd go back and add SoC ones for everything though.
I would prefer we have SoC ones to be future proof..
--
~Vinod
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-03-08 4:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-02-16 11:12 [PATCH] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Document SM8350 CPUfreq compatible Vinod Koul
2021-02-17 4:49 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-02-18 12:44 ` Vinod Koul
2021-02-18 15:48 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-03-05 21:57 ` Rob Herring
2021-03-08 4:56 ` Vinod Koul
2021-02-18 16:11 ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-02-19 17:59 ` Vinod Koul
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).