Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] PCI: qcom: Add X1E80100 PCIe support

[Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>]

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 11:31:50AM +0200, Abel Vesa wrote:
> On 24-02-02 10:55:28, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > On 24-02-02 14:18:06, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 10:41:03AM +0200, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > > > On 24-02-01 20:20:40, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > > On 29.01.2024 12:10, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > > > > > Add the compatible and the driver data for X1E80100.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 1 +
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> > > > > > index 10f2d0bb86be..2a6000e457bc 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> > > > > > @@ -1642,6 +1642,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
> > > > > >  	{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-sm8450-pcie0", .data = &cfg_1_9_0 },
> > > > > >  	{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-sm8450-pcie1", .data = &cfg_1_9_0 },
> > > > > >  	{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-sm8550", .data = &cfg_1_9_0 },
> > > > > > +	{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-x1e80100", .data = &cfg_1_9_0 },
> > > > > 
> > > > > I swear I'm not delaying everything related to x1 on purpose..
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > No worries.
> > > > 
> > > > > But..
> > > > > 
> > > > > Would a "qcom,pcie-v1.9.0" generic match string be a good idea?
> > > > 
> > > > Sure. So that means this would be fallback compatible for all the following platforms:
> > > > 
> > > > - sa8540p
> > > > - sa8775p
> > > > - sc7280
> > > > - sc8180x
> > > > - sc8280xp
> > > > - sdx55
> > > > - sm8150
> > > > - sm8250
> > > > - sm8350
> > > > - sm8450-pcie0
> > > > - sm8450-pcie1
> > > > - sm8550
> > > > - x1e80100
> > > > 
> > > > Will prepare a patchset.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > NO. Fallback should be based on the base SoC for this platform.
> > 
> > Right, so since the SM8250 is the one that has the core version 1.9.0,
> > should we just the sm8550 compatible as fallback for all other ones.
> > 
> > Yes, I know that there is SM8150, which has core version 1.5.0, but it
> > is still 1.9.0 compatible.
> > 
> > Or maybe we should rename the config to 1_5_0 and have the sm8150
> > compatible as fallback for all these platforms.
> > 
> 
> Actually no, that's a bad idea. I would break DT backwards compatibility.
> 

Yes!

> I'll just drop the compatible from driver and add fallback in DT for
> X1E80100.
> 

Sounds good.

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்