From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@impinj.com>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
boris.brezillon@bootlin.com,
linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
ryandcase@chromium.org, Girish Mahadevan <girishm@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: spi: Qualcomm Quad SPI(QSPI) documentation
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 09:02:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=WJXEwej5+mF2-+R=VGZ2WOB1b0TzAByH36TL-Th_3Zzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1537813423.7736.46.camel@impinj.com>
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:23 AM Trent Piepho <tpiepho@impinj.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 10:13 -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > IIUC previous suggestions about just naming it based on the first SoC
> > was due to the difficulty of coming up with a good generic name to
> > give something. For instance you definitely wouldn't want to name it
> > "qcom-qspi-sdm8xx" because you have no idea what future SoCs will be
> > numbered.
>
> And the hypothetical sdm899 might use a non-compatible device that uses
> a different driver, and that really makes "qcom-qspi-sdm8xx" look dumb.
>
> >
> > In the case here calling it "qcom,qspi-v1" is better than that and if
> > Rob gives the thumbs up then I won't object to it. In general though
> > looking at other device tree bindings this doesn't seem like a thing
> > commonly done. Perhaps if we decide it's useful here we should start
> > suggesting it everywhere...
>
> It would help if the programming model or IP core name or whatever this
> is using was mentioned in the public reference manual for the SoC.
> Then is a lot more clear that a number of different SoCs all have the
> same quad spi controller inside them.
>
> Usually it's not like that. The RMs just say, "it's got a SPI master
> with these registers." What SoCs use the same IP module, which
> different? When did they make a new version? The silicon vendors
> don't tell you this. So any name we make up for the IP module likely
> doesn't match reality.
Note that Rob did recently give a positive review to a similar binding. See:
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/979432/
Specifically the text from that binding was:
+ Qcom SoCs must contain, as below, SoC-specific compatibles
+ along with "qcom,smmu-v2":
+ "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2",
+ "qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2".
Given Rob's positive review there, it seems like it would be fine to do:
"qcom,sdm845-qspi", "qcom,qspi-v1".
NOTE: In our case we don't need the "-v1" in SoC-specific case since
there's only one Quad SPI driver there. As I understand it the reason
we needed the -v2 in the SoC-specific case for the SMMU was that there
are two totally different SMMUs in SDM845. You can see history in the
v15 patch <https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/977888/>
-Doug
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-25 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-20 22:40 [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: spi: Qualcomm Quad SPI(QSPI) documentation Ryan Case
2018-09-20 22:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] spi: Introduce new driver for Qualcomm QuadSPI controller Ryan Case
2018-09-20 22:46 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-09-20 23:47 ` Ryan Case
2018-09-21 16:31 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-21 17:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: spi: Qualcomm Quad SPI(QSPI) documentation Stephen Boyd
2018-09-21 17:39 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-21 18:33 ` Trent Piepho
2018-09-21 17:40 ` Doug Anderson
2018-09-21 18:40 ` Stephen Boyd
2018-09-21 18:48 ` Doug Anderson
2018-09-21 18:51 ` Mark Brown
2018-09-23 3:45 ` Stephen Boyd
2018-09-24 17:13 ` Doug Anderson
2018-09-24 18:23 ` Trent Piepho
2018-09-25 16:02 ` Doug Anderson [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAD=FV=WJXEwej5+mF2-+R=VGZ2WOB1b0TzAByH36TL-Th_3Zzg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=boris.brezillon@bootlin.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=girishm@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=ryandcase@chromium.org \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.org \
--cc=tpiepho@impinj.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).