From: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
To: Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@mediatek.com>, robh+dt@kernel.org
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] soc: mediatek: pwrap: add pwrap driver for MT8186 SoC
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 14:17:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5486d12-b048-c062-e571-cf39da7e4c1b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <544f5085fc8597ce9ce3eb7dc1b5d08fb1ac8755.camel@mediatek.com>
On 18/01/2022 10:25, Johnson Wang wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 16:46 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>> On 07/01/2022 11:46, Johnson Wang wrote:
>>> MT8186 are highly integrated SoC and use PMIC_MT6366 for
>>> power management. This patch adds pwrap master driver to
>>> access PMIC_MT6366.
>>>
>>
>> It seems this new arbiter is significantly different from the version
>> 1. Please
>> explain that in the commit message.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@mediatek.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 72
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> index 952bc554f443..78866ebf7f04 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
>>> #define PWRAP_GET_WACS_REQ(x) (((x) >> 19) &
>>> 0x00000001)
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_SYNC_IDLE0 BIT(20)
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0 BIT(21)
>>> +#define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_V2 BIT(22)
>>
>> That's a strange name, does it come from the datasheet description?
>
> Thanks for your review.
>
> No, there is only PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0 in MT8186 datasheet.
> However, it's the 22nd bit in MT8186 and the 21st bit in other SoCs.
> So we changed its name to avoid redefinition of PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0.
>
> Could you give us some suggestion on proper definition naming?
> Do you think PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_MT8186 will be a better choice?
>
Is this a difference that only will show up on the PMIC-wrapper of MT8186 or
will other SoCs include the same IP? If not, then PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_MT8186
should be fine. Otherwise we would need a better name.
>>
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE1 BIT(15)
>>>
>>> /* macro for WACS FSM */
>>> @@ -77,6 +78,8 @@
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_INT1_EN BIT(3)
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_WDT_SRC1 BIT(4)
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_ARB BIT(5)
>>> +#define PWRAP_CAP_MONITOR_V2 BIT(6)
>>
>> Not used capability, please delete.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>
> PWRAP_CAP_MONITOR_V2 is not used right now.
> We can remove it in next version.
> But this capability will be added when we need it.
>
That's OK, we should add capability definitions once they are added to the
driver, not before that.
Thanks,
Matthias
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
To: Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@mediatek.com>, robh+dt@kernel.org
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] soc: mediatek: pwrap: add pwrap driver for MT8186 SoC
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 14:17:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5486d12-b048-c062-e571-cf39da7e4c1b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <544f5085fc8597ce9ce3eb7dc1b5d08fb1ac8755.camel@mediatek.com>
On 18/01/2022 10:25, Johnson Wang wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 16:46 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>> On 07/01/2022 11:46, Johnson Wang wrote:
>>> MT8186 are highly integrated SoC and use PMIC_MT6366 for
>>> power management. This patch adds pwrap master driver to
>>> access PMIC_MT6366.
>>>
>>
>> It seems this new arbiter is significantly different from the version
>> 1. Please
>> explain that in the commit message.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@mediatek.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 72
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> index 952bc554f443..78866ebf7f04 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
>>> #define PWRAP_GET_WACS_REQ(x) (((x) >> 19) &
>>> 0x00000001)
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_SYNC_IDLE0 BIT(20)
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0 BIT(21)
>>> +#define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_V2 BIT(22)
>>
>> That's a strange name, does it come from the datasheet description?
>
> Thanks for your review.
>
> No, there is only PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0 in MT8186 datasheet.
> However, it's the 22nd bit in MT8186 and the 21st bit in other SoCs.
> So we changed its name to avoid redefinition of PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0.
>
> Could you give us some suggestion on proper definition naming?
> Do you think PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_MT8186 will be a better choice?
>
Is this a difference that only will show up on the PMIC-wrapper of MT8186 or
will other SoCs include the same IP? If not, then PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_MT8186
should be fine. Otherwise we would need a better name.
>>
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE1 BIT(15)
>>>
>>> /* macro for WACS FSM */
>>> @@ -77,6 +78,8 @@
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_INT1_EN BIT(3)
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_WDT_SRC1 BIT(4)
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_ARB BIT(5)
>>> +#define PWRAP_CAP_MONITOR_V2 BIT(6)
>>
>> Not used capability, please delete.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>
> PWRAP_CAP_MONITOR_V2 is not used right now.
> We can remove it in next version.
> But this capability will be added when we need it.
>
That's OK, we should add capability definitions once they are added to the
driver, not before that.
Thanks,
Matthias
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
To: Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@mediatek.com>, robh+dt@kernel.org
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] soc: mediatek: pwrap: add pwrap driver for MT8186 SoC
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 14:17:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f5486d12-b048-c062-e571-cf39da7e4c1b@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <544f5085fc8597ce9ce3eb7dc1b5d08fb1ac8755.camel@mediatek.com>
On 18/01/2022 10:25, Johnson Wang wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 16:46 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>> On 07/01/2022 11:46, Johnson Wang wrote:
>>> MT8186 are highly integrated SoC and use PMIC_MT6366 for
>>> power management. This patch adds pwrap master driver to
>>> access PMIC_MT6366.
>>>
>>
>> It seems this new arbiter is significantly different from the version
>> 1. Please
>> explain that in the commit message.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@mediatek.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c | 72
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> index 952bc554f443..78866ebf7f04 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c
>>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
>>> #define PWRAP_GET_WACS_REQ(x) (((x) >> 19) &
>>> 0x00000001)
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_SYNC_IDLE0 BIT(20)
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0 BIT(21)
>>> +#define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_V2 BIT(22)
>>
>> That's a strange name, does it come from the datasheet description?
>
> Thanks for your review.
>
> No, there is only PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0 in MT8186 datasheet.
> However, it's the 22nd bit in MT8186 and the 21st bit in other SoCs.
> So we changed its name to avoid redefinition of PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0.
>
> Could you give us some suggestion on proper definition naming?
> Do you think PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_MT8186 will be a better choice?
>
Is this a difference that only will show up on the PMIC-wrapper of MT8186 or
will other SoCs include the same IP? If not, then PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE0_MT8186
should be fine. Otherwise we would need a better name.
>>
>>> #define PWRAP_STATE_INIT_DONE1 BIT(15)
>>>
>>> /* macro for WACS FSM */
>>> @@ -77,6 +78,8 @@
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_INT1_EN BIT(3)
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_WDT_SRC1 BIT(4)
>>> #define PWRAP_CAP_ARB BIT(5)
>>> +#define PWRAP_CAP_MONITOR_V2 BIT(6)
>>
>> Not used capability, please delete.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Matthias
>
> PWRAP_CAP_MONITOR_V2 is not used right now.
> We can remove it in next version.
> But this capability will be added when we need it.
>
That's OK, we should add capability definitions once they are added to the
driver, not before that.
Thanks,
Matthias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-18 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-07 10:46 [PATCH v2 0/2] Add PMIC wrapper support for Mediatek MT8186 SoC IC Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] soc: mediatek: pwrap: add pwrap driver for MT8186 SoC Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 11:11 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2022-01-07 11:11 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2022-01-07 11:11 ` AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2022-01-14 15:46 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-14 15:46 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-14 15:46 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-18 9:25 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-18 9:25 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-18 9:25 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-18 13:17 ` Matthias Brugger [this message]
2022-01-18 13:17 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-18 13:17 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-25 12:51 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-25 12:51 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-25 12:51 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-14 16:08 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-14 16:08 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-14 16:08 ` Matthias Brugger
2022-01-07 10:46 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: mediatek: add compatible for MT8186 pwrap Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-07 10:46 ` Johnson Wang
2022-01-12 1:49 ` Rob Herring
2022-01-12 1:49 ` Rob Herring
2022-01-12 1:49 ` Rob Herring
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=f5486d12-b048-c062-e571-cf39da7e4c1b@gmail.com \
--to=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johnson.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.