[PATCH 0/5] Add misc support for QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs

[PATCH 0/5] Add misc support for QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs

[Melody Olvera]

This series firmware, SoC, rpmpd, tz-log, and mmc bindings as well as
pmic, rpmpd, and socinfo support for QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoCs.

This patchset is based off of [1] and [2] YAML conversion patches.

The Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Distributed Unit 1000 and Radio Unit
1000 are new SoCs meant for enabling Open RAN solutions. See more at
https://www.qualcomm.com/content/dam/qcomm-martech/dm-assets/documents/qualcomm_5g_ran_platforms_product_brief.pdf

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220708090431.30437-1-david@ixit.cz
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220815100952.23795-8-a39.skl@gmail.com

Melody Olvera (5):
  dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles
  dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs and boards
  dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 to rpmpd binding
  soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 power domains
  soc: qcom: socinfo: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 and variant IDs

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml  | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml   |  2 ++
 .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml    |  2 ++
 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c                        | 13 +++++++++++++
 drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c                       |  6 ++++++
 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h           |  6 ++++++
 6 files changed, 45 insertions(+)


base-commit: 987a926c1d8a40e4256953b04771fbdb63bc7938
prerequisite-patch-id: 54cfdb75ec88e75b31d5c1df0d4a361434334d2b
prerequisite-patch-id: b0108c3601b8ed11cefe4366aa506b2dca364866
-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Melody Olvera]

Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.

Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
@@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
           - qcom,scm-sm8250
           - qcom,scm-sm8350
           - qcom,scm-sm8450
+          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
+          - qcom,scm-qru1000
           - qcom,scm-qcs404
       - const: qcom,scm
 
-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs and boards

[Melody Olvera]

Document the QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoC bindings and the boards that use
them.

Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
index fb1d00bcc847..1cfd92f4ab5d 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
@@ -61,6 +61,8 @@ description: |
         sm8250
         sm8350
         sm8450
+        qdu1000
+        qru1000
 
   The 'board' element must be one of the following strings:
 
@@ -76,6 +78,7 @@ description: |
         mtp
         qrd
         sbc
+        x100
 
   The 'soc_version' and 'board_version' elements take the form of v<Major>.<Minor>
   where the minor number may be omitted when it's zero, i.e.  v1.0 is the same
@@ -718,6 +721,19 @@ properties:
               - qcom,sm8450-qrd
           - const: qcom,sm8450
 
+      - description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Distributed Unit 1000 platform
+          - items:
+              - enum:
+                  - qcom,qdu1000-idp
+                  - qcom,qdu1000-x100
+              - const: qcom,qdu1000
+
+      - description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Radio Unit 1000 platform
+          - items:
+              - enum:
+                  -qcom,qru1000-idp
+              - const: qcom,qru1000
+
 additionalProperties: true
 
 ...
-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH 3/5] dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 to rpmpd binding

[Melody Olvera]

Add compatible and constants for the power domains exposed by the RPMH
in the Qualcomm QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.

Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml | 2 ++
 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h                  | 6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
index 3934a2b44894..7343cfc91262 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
@@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ properties:
       - qcom,sm8250-rpmhpd
       - qcom,sm8350-rpmhpd
       - qcom,sm8450-rpmhpd
+      - qcom,qdu1000-rpmhpd
+      - qcom,qru1000-rpmhpd
 
   '#power-domain-cells':
     const: 1
diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
index d81de63ae31c..e0d9e5b48a4d 100644
--- a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
+++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
@@ -91,6 +91,12 @@
 #define SM8450_MXC_AO	11
 #define SM8450_MSS	12
 
+/* QDU1000/QRU1000 Power Domain Indexes */
+#define QDRU1000_EBI	0
+#define QDRU1000_MSS	1
+#define QDRU1000_CX	2
+#define QDRU1000_MX	3
+
 /* SC7180 Power Domain Indexes */
 #define SC7180_CX	0
 #define SC7180_CX_AO	1
-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH 4/5] soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 power domains

[Melody Olvera]

Add the power domains exposed by RPMH in the Qualcomm QDU1000
and QRU1000 platforms.

Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
---
 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 13 +++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
index 092f6ab09acf..f70573cbc636 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
@@ -353,6 +353,19 @@ static const struct rpmhpd_desc sm8450_desc = {
 	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8450_rpmhpds),
 };
 
+/* QDU1000/QRU1000 RPMH powerdomains */
+static struct rpmhpd *qdru1000_rpmhpds[] = {
+	[QDRU1000_CX] = &cx,
+	[QDRU1000_EBI] = &ebi,
+	[QDRU1000_MSS] = &mss,
+	[QDRU1000_MX] = &mx,
+};
+
+static const struct rpmhpd_desc qdru1000_desc = {
+	.rpmhpds = qdru1000_rpmhpds,
+	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(qdru1000_rpmhpds),
+};
+
 /* SC7180 RPMH powerdomains */
 static struct rpmhpd *sc7180_rpmhpds[] = {
 	[SC7180_CX] = &cx_w_mx_parent,
-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH 5/5] soc: qcom: socinfo: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 and variant IDs

[Melody Olvera]

Add soc IDs for QDU1000 and QRU1000 and their variants.

Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
---
 drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
index 4554fb8655d3..d10942b1b9a7 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
@@ -334,6 +334,12 @@ static const struct soc_id soc_id[] = {
 	{ 482, "SM8450" },
 	{ 487, "SC7280" },
 	{ 495, "SC7180P" },
+	{ 539, "QRU1000" },
+	{ 545, "QDU1000" },
+	{ 587, "QDU1010" },
+	{ 588, "QRU1032" },
+	{ 589, "QRU1052" },
+	{ 590, "QRU1062" },
 };
 
 static const char *socinfo_machine(struct device *dev, unsigned int id)
-- 
2.37.3

Re: [PATCH 4/5] soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 power domains

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On 01/10/2022 06:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Add the power domains exposed by RPMH in the Qualcomm QDU1000
> and QRU1000 platforms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>

Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>

> ---
>   drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
> index 092f6ab09acf..f70573cbc636 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
> @@ -353,6 +353,19 @@ static const struct rpmhpd_desc sm8450_desc = {
>   	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8450_rpmhpds),
>   };
>   
> +/* QDU1000/QRU1000 RPMH powerdomains */
> +static struct rpmhpd *qdru1000_rpmhpds[] = {
> +	[QDRU1000_CX] = &cx,
> +	[QDRU1000_EBI] = &ebi,
> +	[QDRU1000_MSS] = &mss,
> +	[QDRU1000_MX] = &mx,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct rpmhpd_desc qdru1000_desc = {
> +	.rpmhpds = qdru1000_rpmhpds,
> +	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(qdru1000_rpmhpds),
> +};
> +
>   /* SC7180 RPMH powerdomains */
>   static struct rpmhpd *sc7180_rpmhpds[] = {
>   	[SC7180_CX] = &cx_w_mx_parent,

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000

Items should be ordered alphabetically.

>            - qcom,scm-qcs404
>        - const: qcom,scm

Patch is incomplete. Missing changes for allOf.

>  

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs and boards

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Document the QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoC bindings and the boards that use
> them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 16 ++++++++++++++++

This patch goes with DT.

>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> index fb1d00bcc847..1cfd92f4ab5d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> @@ -61,6 +61,8 @@ description: |
>          sm8250
>          sm8350
>          sm8450
> +        qdu1000
> +        qru1000
>  
>    The 'board' element must be one of the following strings:
>  
> @@ -76,6 +78,7 @@ description: |
>          mtp
>          qrd
>          sbc
> +        x100
>  
>    The 'soc_version' and 'board_version' elements take the form of v<Major>.<Minor>
>    where the minor number may be omitted when it's zero, i.e.  v1.0 is the same
> @@ -718,6 +721,19 @@ properties:
>                - qcom,sm8450-qrd
>            - const: qcom,sm8450
>  
> +      - description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Distributed Unit 1000 platform
> +          - items:
> +              - enum:
> +                  - qcom,qdu1000-idp
> +                  - qcom,qdu1000-x100
> +              - const: qcom,qdu1000

Wrong order - you put it in some odd place.

> +
> +      - description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Radio Unit 1000 platform
> +          - items:
> +              - enum:
> +                  -qcom,qru1000-idp

Missing space.

> +              - const: qcom,qru1000
> +
>  additionalProperties: true
>  
>  ...

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 3/5] dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 to rpmpd binding

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Add compatible and constants for the power domains exposed by the RPMH
> in the Qualcomm QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml | 2 ++
>  include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h                  | 6 ++++++
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
> index 3934a2b44894..7343cfc91262 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
> @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ properties:
>        - qcom,sm8250-rpmhpd
>        - qcom,sm8350-rpmhpd
>        - qcom,sm8450-rpmhpd
> +      - qcom,qdu1000-rpmhpd
> +      - qcom,qru1000-rpmhpd

Wrong order.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 5/5] soc: qcom: socinfo: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 and variant IDs

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Add soc IDs for QDU1000 and QRU1000 and their variants.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
> index 4554fb8655d3..d10942b1b9a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
> @@ -334,6 +334,12 @@ static const struct soc_id soc_id[] = {
>  	{ 482, "SM8450" },
>  	{ 487, "SC7280" },
>  	{ 495, "SC7180P" },
> +	{ 539, "QRU1000" },
> +	{ 545, "QDU1000" },
> +	{ 587, "QDU1010" },
> +	{ 588, "QRU1032" },
> +	{ 589, "QRU1052" },
> +	{ 590, "QRU1062" },

Rebase on this patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/20220830065744.161163-3-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/

It is quite discouraging that it could not be merged through that entire
time...

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add misc support for QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> This series firmware, SoC, rpmpd, tz-log, and mmc bindings as well as
> pmic, rpmpd, and socinfo support for QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoCs.
> 
> This patchset is based off of [1] and [2] YAML conversion patches.

All of your patchsets were sent to wrong Bjorn's address. This means
either you based on mainline (which is reasonable but for some reason
address was not fixed in mainline...) or on some older linux-next.

I propose to rebase on recent linux-next, so you will get proper Bjorn's
email.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs and boards

[Rob Herring]

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 20:06:38 -0700, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Document the QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoC bindings and the boards that use
> them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> 

My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):

yamllint warnings/errors:
./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml:725:18: [error] syntax error: mapping values are not allowed here (syntax)

dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
make[1]: *** Deleting file 'Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.example.dts'
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml:725:18: mapping values are not allowed in this context
make[1]: *** [Documentation/devicetree/bindings/Makefile:26: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.example.dts] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml:725:18: mapping values are not allowed in this context
/builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml: ignoring, error parsing file
make: *** [Makefile:1420: dt_binding_check] Error 2

doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):

See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/

This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a patch
series is generally the most recent rc1.

If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to
date:

pip3 install dtschema --upgrade

Please check and re-submit.

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
> Items should be ordered alphabetically.
Will fix.
>
>>            - qcom,scm-qcs404
>>        - const: qcom,scm
> Patch is incomplete. Missing changes for allOf.
Will add.
>
>>  
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Thanks,

Melody

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> >> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> >> ---
> >>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
> >>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
> >>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
> >>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
> >> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
> >> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000

I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
strings in most of the cases.
Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?

E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.

> > Items should be ordered alphabetically.
> Will fix.
> >
> >>            - qcom,scm-qcs404
> >>        - const: qcom,scm
> > Patch is incomplete. Missing changes for allOf.
> Will add.
> >
> >>
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
>
> Thanks,
>
> Melody
>


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
> 
> I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
> question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
> qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
> strings in most of the cases.
> Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
> distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
> 
> E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
> apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
> block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
> 

I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
differences between QDU and QRU?

For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 09:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> >>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
> >>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
> >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
> >>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
> >>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
> >>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
> >>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
> >>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
> >
> > I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
> > question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
> > qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
> > strings in most of the cases.
> > Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
> > distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
> >
> > E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
> > apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
> > block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
> >
>
> I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
> differences between QDU and QRU?
>
> For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
> have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
> very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.

Well, true. But in some cases we handle this by using a single set of
compatibles. Consider e.g. sa8155 vs sm8150 (sa8155 overrides just few
compats that differ). Or qrb5165 vs sm8250 (there is no separate
qrb5165.dtsi). APQ8096 (#include "msm8996.dtsi"). Etc.

I'd say this really depends on the actual difference between qru and qdu.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs and boards

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/1/2022 4:26 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> Document the QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoC bindings and the boards that use
>> them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> This patch goes with DT.
Will move to the dt PS.
>
>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> index fb1d00bcc847..1cfd92f4ab5d 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> @@ -61,6 +61,8 @@ description: |
>>          sm8250
>>          sm8350
>>          sm8450
>> +        qdu1000
>> +        qru1000
>>  
>>    The 'board' element must be one of the following strings:
>>  
>> @@ -76,6 +78,7 @@ description: |
>>          mtp
>>          qrd
>>          sbc
>> +        x100
>>  
>>    The 'soc_version' and 'board_version' elements take the form of v<Major>.<Minor>
>>    where the minor number may be omitted when it's zero, i.e.  v1.0 is the same
>> @@ -718,6 +721,19 @@ properties:
>>                - qcom,sm8450-qrd
>>            - const: qcom,sm8450
>>  
>> +      - description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Distributed Unit 1000 platform
>> +          - items:
>> +              - enum:
>> +                  - qcom,qdu1000-idp
>> +                  - qcom,qdu1000-x100
>> +              - const: qcom,qdu1000
> Wrong order - you put it in some odd place.
Will put in alphabetical order.
>
>> +
>> +      - description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Radio Unit 1000 platform
>> +          - items:
>> +              - enum:
>> +                  -qcom,qru1000-idp
> Missing space.
Whoops; will fix.
>
>> +              - const: qcom,qru1000
>> +
>>  additionalProperties: true
>>  
>>  ...
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Thanks,

Melody

Re: [PATCH 3/5] dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 to rpmpd binding

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/1/2022 4:27 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> Add compatible and constants for the power domains exposed by the RPMH
>> in the Qualcomm QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml | 2 ++
>>  include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h                  | 6 ++++++
>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
>> index 3934a2b44894..7343cfc91262 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
>> @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@ properties:
>>        - qcom,sm8250-rpmhpd
>>        - qcom,sm8350-rpmhpd
>>        - qcom,sm8450-rpmhpd
>> +      - qcom,qdu1000-rpmhpd
>> +      - qcom,qru1000-rpmhpd
> Wrong order.
Will fix.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Thanks,

Melody

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add misc support for QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/1/2022 4:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> This series firmware, SoC, rpmpd, tz-log, and mmc bindings as well as
>> pmic, rpmpd, and socinfo support for QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoCs.
>>
>> This patchset is based off of [1] and [2] YAML conversion patches.
> All of your patchsets were sent to wrong Bjorn's address. This means
> either you based on mainline (which is reasonable but for some reason
> address was not fixed in mainline...) or on some older linux-next.
>
> I propose to rebase on recent linux-next, so you will get proper Bjorn's
> email.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Thanks Krzysztof. Yeah I figured that out; will add his most recent email in the next patchset. I was working on the tip of the linux-next stable branch, but does it make more sense to rebase on the master branch of linux-next prior to submitting?

Thanks,

Melody

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/4/2022 2:36 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 09:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
>>> I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
>>> question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
>>> qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
>>> strings in most of the cases.
>>> Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
>>> distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
>>>
>>> E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
>>> apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
>>> block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
>>>
>> I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
>> differences between QDU and QRU?
>>
>> For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
>> have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
>> very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.
> Well, true. But in some cases we handle this by using a single set of
> compatibles. Consider e.g. sa8155 vs sm8150 (sa8155 overrides just few
> compats that differ). Or qrb5165 vs sm8250 (there is no separate
> qrb5165.dtsi). APQ8096 (#include "msm8996.dtsi"). Etc.
>
> I'd say this really depends on the actual difference between qru and qdu.

To add some clarification, there's pretty little functional difference between the QDU (Distributed Unit) and the QRU (Radio Unit); they're largely the same SoC from the kernel's standpoint. I wasn't sure if it made more sense to separate the compat strings or mash them together (using qdru to specify that it applies to both), so I kept separate compat strings in case there was a separate RU/DU use case down the line and also to avoid some confusion (I guess that didn't work though). It makes the most sense in my mind to just use the qdru compat string for the things that apply to both SoCs (which is most of what's submitted currently) and then we can do qdu/qru specific override strings for more specific drivers.

Thanks,

Melody

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add misc support for QDU1000/QRU1000 SoCs

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/4/2022 10:27 AM, Melody Olvera wrote:
> On 10/1/2022 4:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>> This series firmware, SoC, rpmpd, tz-log, and mmc bindings as well as
>>> pmic, rpmpd, and socinfo support for QDU1000 and QRU1000 SoCs.
>>>
>>> This patchset is based off of [1] and [2] YAML conversion patches.
>> All of your patchsets were sent to wrong Bjorn's address. This means
>> either you based on mainline (which is reasonable but for some reason
>> address was not fixed in mainline...) or on some older linux-next.
>>
>> I propose to rebase on recent linux-next, so you will get proper Bjorn's
>> email.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> Thanks Krzysztof. Yeah I figured that out; will add his most recent
> email in the next patchset. I was working on the tip of the linux-next
> stable branch, but does it make more sense to rebase on the master
> branch of linux-next prior to submitting? 
> Thanks, Melody 

Fixed formatting.

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/4/2022 10:52 AM, Melody Olvera wrote:
> On 10/4/2022 2:36 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 09:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
>>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
>>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
>>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
>>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
>>>> I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
>>>> question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
>>>> qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
>>>> strings in most of the cases.
>>>> Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
>>>> distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
>>>>
>>>> E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
>>>> apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
>>>> block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
>>>>
>>> I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
>>> differences between QDU and QRU?
>>>
>>> For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
>>> have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
>>> very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.
>> Well, true. But in some cases we handle this by using a single set of
>> compatibles. Consider e.g. sa8155 vs sm8150 (sa8155 overrides just few
>> compats that differ). Or qrb5165 vs sm8250 (there is no separate
>> qrb5165.dtsi). APQ8096 (#include "msm8996.dtsi"). Etc.
>>
>> I'd say this really depends on the actual difference between qru and qdu.
> To add some clarification, there's pretty little functional
> difference between the QDU (Distributed Unit) and the QRU
> (Radio Unit); they're largely the same SoC from the kernel's
> standpoint. I wasn't sure if it made more sense to separate
> the compat strings or mash them together (using qdru to
> specify that it applies to both), so I kept separate compat
> strings in case there was a separate RU/DU use case down
> the line and also to avoid some confusion (I guess that
> didn't work though). It makes the most sense in my mind
> to just use the qdru compat string for the things that apply
> to both SoCs (which is most of what's submitted currently) and
> then we can do qdu/qru specific override strings for more
> specific drivers. 
> Thanks, Melody 
Fixed formatting.

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 18:52, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/4/2022 2:36 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 09:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
> >>>>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
> >>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >>>>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
> >>>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
> >>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
> >>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
> >>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
> >>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
> >>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
> >>> I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
> >>> question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
> >>> qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
> >>> strings in most of the cases.
> >>> Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
> >>> distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
> >>>
> >>> E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
> >>> apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
> >>> block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
> >>>
> >> I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
> >> differences between QDU and QRU?
> >>
> >> For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
> >> have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
> >> very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.
> > Well, true. But in some cases we handle this by using a single set of
> > compatibles. Consider e.g. sa8155 vs sm8150 (sa8155 overrides just few
> > compats that differ). Or qrb5165 vs sm8250 (there is no separate
> > qrb5165.dtsi). APQ8096 (#include "msm8996.dtsi"). Etc.
> >
> > I'd say this really depends on the actual difference between qru and qdu.
>
> To add some clarification, there's pretty little functional difference between the QDU (Distributed Unit) and the QRU (Radio Unit); they're largely the same SoC from the kernel's standpoint. I wasn't sure if it made more sense to separate the compat strings or mash them together (using qdru to specify that it applies to both), so I kept separate compat strings in case there was a separate RU/DU use case down the line and also to avoid some confusion (I guess that didn't work though). It makes the most sense in my mind to just use the qdru compat string for the things that apply to both SoCs (which is most of what's submitted currently) and then we can do qdu/qru specific override strings for more specific drivers.

Unless Krzysztof or Bjorn have other opinion, I'd suggest adding a
single compat string, It might be qcom,qdru1000-foo or just
qcom,qdu1000-foo (with having a separate qcom,qru1000-foo where
applicable). But the final decision is from Rob, Krzysztof and Bjorn.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 04/10/2022 23:05, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 18:52, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/4/2022 2:36 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 09:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>> On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>>>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>>>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8250
>>>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8350
>>>>>>>>            - qcom,scm-sm8450
>>>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
>>>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
>>>>> I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
>>>>> question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
>>>>> qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
>>>>> strings in most of the cases.
>>>>> Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
>>>>> distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
>>>>> apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
>>>>> block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
>>>>>
>>>> I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
>>>> differences between QDU and QRU?
>>>>
>>>> For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
>>>> have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
>>>> very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.
>>> Well, true. But in some cases we handle this by using a single set of
>>> compatibles. Consider e.g. sa8155 vs sm8150 (sa8155 overrides just few
>>> compats that differ). Or qrb5165 vs sm8250 (there is no separate
>>> qrb5165.dtsi). APQ8096 (#include "msm8996.dtsi"). Etc.
>>>
>>> I'd say this really depends on the actual difference between qru and qdu.
>>
>> To add some clarification, there's pretty little functional difference between the QDU (Distributed Unit) and the QRU (Radio Unit); they're largely the same SoC from the kernel's standpoint. I wasn't sure if it made more sense to separate the compat strings or mash them together (using qdru to specify that it applies to both), so I kept separate compat strings in case there was a separate RU/DU use case down the line and also to avoid some confusion (I guess that didn't work though). It makes the most sense in my mind to just use the qdru compat string for the things that apply to both SoCs (which is most of what's submitted currently) and then we can do qdu/qru specific override strings for more specific drivers.
> 
> Unless Krzysztof or Bjorn have other opinion, I'd suggest adding a
> single compat string, It might be qcom,qdru1000-foo or just
> qcom,qdu1000-foo (with having a separate qcom,qru1000-foo where
> applicable). But the final decision is from Rob, Krzysztof and Bjorn.

If qdru1000 is a real SoC name, then it is fine. But it seems it is
rather a wildcard, which in general is discouraged. Go with qdu1000 and
optionally prepended with qru1000.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles

[Trilok Soni]

On 10/5/2022 1:27 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/10/2022 23:05, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 18:52, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/4/2022 2:36 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 09:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 04/10/2022 00:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>>>>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>>>> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml
>>>>>>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties:
>>>>>>>>>             - qcom,scm-sm8250
>>>>>>>>>             - qcom,scm-sm8350
>>>>>>>>>             - qcom,scm-sm8450
>>>>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qdu1000
>>>>>>>>> +          - qcom,scm-qru1000
>>>>>> I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following
>>>>>> question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families:
>>>>>> qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile
>>>>>> strings in most of the cases.
>>>>>> Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define
>>>>>> distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660,
>>>>>> apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware
>>>>>> block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I am not that fluent in Qualcomm naming, so let me ask - what are the
>>>>> differences between QDU and QRU?
>>>>>
>>>>> For compatible (and/or similar) devices the general recommendation is to
>>>>> have specific compatibles followed by fallback. Even if devices are
>>>>> very, very, very similar, usually the recommendation still stays.
>>>> Well, true. But in some cases we handle this by using a single set of
>>>> compatibles. Consider e.g. sa8155 vs sm8150 (sa8155 overrides just few
>>>> compats that differ). Or qrb5165 vs sm8250 (there is no separate
>>>> qrb5165.dtsi). APQ8096 (#include "msm8996.dtsi"). Etc.
>>>>
>>>> I'd say this really depends on the actual difference between qru and qdu.
>>>
>>> To add some clarification, there's pretty little functional difference between the QDU (Distributed Unit) and the QRU (Radio Unit); they're largely the same SoC from the kernel's standpoint. I wasn't sure if it made more sense to separate the compat strings or mash them together (using qdru to specify that it applies to both), so I kept separate compat strings in case there was a separate RU/DU use case down the line and also to avoid some confusion (I guess that didn't work though). It makes the most sense in my mind to just use the qdru compat string for the things that apply to both SoCs (which is most of what's submitted currently) and then we can do qdu/qru specific override strings for more specific drivers.
>>
>> Unless Krzysztof or Bjorn have other opinion, I'd suggest adding a
>> single compat string, It might be qcom,qdru1000-foo or just
>> qcom,qdu1000-foo (with having a separate qcom,qru1000-foo where
>> applicable). But the final decision is from Rob, Krzysztof and Bjorn.
> 
> If qdru1000 is a real SoC name, then it is fine. But it seems it is
> rather a wildcard, which in general is discouraged. Go with qdu1000 and
> optionally prepended with qru1000.

qdru1000 is not a real SOC, so let's not use that. Prefer to use qdu1000 
and qru1000 with whatever approach we decide.

---Trilok Soni

Re: [PATCH 4/5] soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 power domains

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:06:40PM -0700, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Add the power domains exposed by RPMH in the Qualcomm QDU1000
> and QRU1000 platforms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
> index 092f6ab09acf..f70573cbc636 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
> @@ -353,6 +353,19 @@ static const struct rpmhpd_desc sm8450_desc = {
>  	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8450_rpmhpds),
>  };
>  
> +/* QDU1000/QRU1000 RPMH powerdomains */
> +static struct rpmhpd *qdru1000_rpmhpds[] = {
> +	[QDRU1000_CX] = &cx,
> +	[QDRU1000_EBI] = &ebi,
> +	[QDRU1000_MSS] = &mss,
> +	[QDRU1000_MX] = &mx,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct rpmhpd_desc qdru1000_desc = {
> +	.rpmhpds = qdru1000_rpmhpds,
> +	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(qdru1000_rpmhpds),
> +};
> +

Looks like you missed adding a (or two) entires to rpmhpd_match_table.

Regards,
Bjorn

>  /* SC7180 RPMH powerdomains */
>  static struct rpmhpd *sc7180_rpmhpds[] = {
>  	[SC7180_CX] = &cx_w_mx_parent,
> -- 
> 2.37.3
> 

Re: [PATCH 4/5] soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 power domains

[Melody Olvera]

On 10/6/2022 8:11 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:06:40PM -0700, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> Add the power domains exposed by RPMH in the Qualcomm QDU1000
>> and QRU1000 platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
>> index 092f6ab09acf..f70573cbc636 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c
>> @@ -353,6 +353,19 @@ static const struct rpmhpd_desc sm8450_desc = {
>>  	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8450_rpmhpds),
>>  };
>>  
>> +/* QDU1000/QRU1000 RPMH powerdomains */
>> +static struct rpmhpd *qdru1000_rpmhpds[] = {
>> +	[QDRU1000_CX] = &cx,
>> +	[QDRU1000_EBI] = &ebi,
>> +	[QDRU1000_MSS] = &mss,
>> +	[QDRU1000_MX] = &mx,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct rpmhpd_desc qdru1000_desc = {
>> +	.rpmhpds = qdru1000_rpmhpds,
>> +	.num_pds = ARRAY_SIZE(qdru1000_rpmhpds),
>> +};
>> +
> Looks like you missed adding a (or two) entires to rpmhpd_match_table.
So I did. Will add.
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
>
>>  /* SC7180 RPMH powerdomains */
>>  static struct rpmhpd *sc7180_rpmhpds[] = {
>>  	[SC7180_CX] = &cx_w_mx_parent,
>> -- 
>> 2.37.3
>>
Thanks,
Melody