Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] PCI: exynos: Add support for Tesla FSD SoC

[Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 04:48:13PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
> > Sent: 28 June 2025 01:01
> > To: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@samsung.com>
> > Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org;
> linux-
> > samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-phy@lists.infradead.org; linux-
> > fsd@tesla.com; manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org; lpieralisi@kernel.org; kw@linux.com;
> > robh@kernel.org; bhelgaas@google.com; jingoohan1@gmail.com; krzk+dt@kernel.org;
> > conor+dt@kernel.org; alim.akhtar@samsung.com; vkoul@kernel.org; kishon@kernel.org;
> > arnd@arndb.de; m.szyprowski@samsung.com; jh80.chung@samsung.com; pankaj.dubey@samsung.com
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] PCI: exynos: Add support for Tesla FSD SoC

Would be good if your mailer could support the usual quote mechanism,
e.g. the "On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:22:28PM +0530, Shradha Todi
wrote:" line below.  No need for all the header duplication above.

> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:22:28PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote:
> > > Add host and endpoint controller driver support for FSD SoC.

> > This would be a little nicer if you added soc_variant and device_mode
> > and the code that sets and tests them for exynos_5433 first in a
> > separate patch.  Then it would be more obvious that the new FSD parts
> > don't affect exynos_5433 since this patch would only be *adding*
> > FSD-specific things.
> 
> Sure,  I have no issues in splitting the patches further. Though
> unfortunately, I or anyone I know does not possess a board which has
> Exynos 5433 chipset.  Therefore, I'm unable to verify these changes
> for Exynos chipset. I took care to not disturb the exynos flow
> functionally but would be great if someone could test this and
> confirm that it works well on Exynos 5433 after the changes.

Yeah, that's a common situation, and there's no problem with adding
this functionality.  But in the unlikely event there's a mistake that
relates to Exynos 5433, it will be easier for someone with that board
to analyze the problem if the changes that affect exynos_5433 are
split out into a patch that doesn't include any FSD-related changes.

> > >  static const struct samsung_pcie_pdata exynos_5433_pcie_rc_pdata = {
> > >  	.dwc_ops		= &exynos_dw_pcie_ops,
> > >  	.pci_ops		= &exynos_pci_ops,
> > >  	.host_ops		= &exynos_pcie_host_ops,
> > >  	.res_ops		= &exynos_res_ops_data,
> > > +	.soc_variant		= EXYNOS_5433,
> > > +	.device_mode		= DW_PCIE_RC_TYPE,
> > >  };
> > 
> > >  static const struct of_device_id exynos_pcie_of_match[] = {
> > > @@ -449,6 +756,14 @@ static const struct of_device_id exynos_pcie_of_match[] = {
> > >  		.compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-pcie",
> > >  		.data = (void *) &exynos_5433_pcie_rc_pdata,
> > >  	},
>