Re: [PATCH 8/8] soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add support for MT8365

[Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@baylibre.com>]

Hi Matthias,

On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 01:22:38PM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05/01/2023 18:07, Markus Schneider-Pargmann wrote:
> > From: Fabien Parent <fparent@baylibre.com>
> > 
> > Add the needed board data to support MT8365 SoC.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Fabien Parent <fparent@baylibre.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Schneider-Pargmann <msp@baylibre.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8365-pm-domains.h | 147 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pm-domains.c    |   5 +
> >   2 files changed, 152 insertions(+)
> >   create mode 100644 drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8365-pm-domains.h
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8365-pm-domains.h b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8365-pm-domains.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..8735e833b15b
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8365-pm-domains.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> > +
> > +#ifndef __SOC_MEDIATEK_MT8365_PM_DOMAINS_H
> > +#define __SOC_MEDIATEK_MT8365_PM_DOMAINS_H
> > +
> > +#include "mtk-pm-domains.h"
> > +#include <dt-bindings/power/mediatek,mt8365-power.h>
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * MT8365 power domain support
> > + */
> > +
> > +static const struct scpsys_domain_data scpsys_domain_data_mt8365[] = {
> > +	[MT8365_POWER_DOMAIN_MM] = {
> > +		.name = "mm",
> > +		.sta_mask = PWR_STATUS_DISP,
> > +		.ctl_offs = 0x30c,
> > +		.pwr_sta_offs = 0x0180,
> > +		.pwr_sta2nd_offs = 0x0184,
> > +		.sram_pdn_bits = GENMASK(8, 8),
> > +		.sram_pdn_ack_bits = GENMASK(12, 12),
> > +		.caps = MTK_SCPD_STRICT_BUS_PROTECTION | MTK_SCPD_HAS_WAY_EN,
> > +		.bp_infracfg = {
> > +			BUS_PROT_WR(BIT(16) | BIT(17), 0x2a8, 0x2ac, 0x258),
> > +			BUS_PROT_WR(BIT(1) | BIT(2) | BIT(10) | BIT(11), 0x2a0, 0x2a4, 0x228),
> > +			BUS_PROT_WAY_EN(BIT(6), 0x200, BIT(24), 0x0),
> > +			BUS_PROT_WAY_EN(BIT(5), 0x234, BIT(14), 0x28),
> > +			BUS_PROT_WR(BIT(6), 0x2a0, 0x2a4, 0x228),
> 
> 
> BUS_PROT_WR(BIT(6), 0x2a0, 0x2a4, 0x228) repeates several times in the
> definition. Would it make sense to create a new define like we did with
> BUS_PROT_UPDATE_TOPAXI()? Are this offests are used in other SoCs.
> 
> In any case instead of magic numbers the values should be defined in
> include/linux/soc/mediatek/infracfg.h or appropiate header files.

Thanks, you are right, I got rid of all the magic numbers and introduced
some helper defines as well.

Thank you,
Markus

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel