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

[Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>]

On 11/28/2022 9:25 AM, Melody Olvera wrote:
>
> 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

I think though for these PS, I'll stick to doing w QDU1000. So I'll have a file qcom,qdu1000-rpmh.yaml
and qcom,qdu1000-rpmh-virt.yaml

Thanks,
Melody

>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>