[PATCH 0/5] dma/arm64: qcom: use one compatible also for 0x10000 offset

[PATCH 0/5] dma/arm64: qcom: use one compatible also for 0x10000 offset

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Hi,

Dependencies
============
1. DT bindings and DMA driver change depends contextually on:
   https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220927014846.32892-1-mailingradian@gmail.com/

2. DTS patches are independent, although they will spark some dtbs_check
   warnings (due to change in bindings).

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Krzysztof Kozlowski (5):
  dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback
  dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding
  arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback
  arm64: dts: qcom: sm8350: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback
  arm64: dts: qcom: sm8450: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi                |  4 ++--
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi                |  6 +++---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi                |  6 +++---
 drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c                              |  7 ++++---
 5 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible,
so use one compatible fallback for all of them.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
index 750b40c32213..0c2894498845 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
@@ -20,12 +20,14 @@ properties:
   compatible:
     oneOf:
       - enum:
-          - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
           - qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma
           - qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
-          - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
-          - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
-
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
+              - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
+              - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
+          - const: qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
       - items:
           - enum:
               - qcom,sdm670-gpi-dma
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback

[Vinod Koul]

On 15-10-22, 10:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible,
> so use one compatible fallback for all of them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
> index 750b40c32213..0c2894498845 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
> @@ -20,12 +20,14 @@ properties:
>    compatible:
>      oneOf:
>        - enum:
> -          - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
>            - qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma
>            - qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
> -          - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
> -          - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
> -
> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
> +              - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
> +              - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
> +          - const: qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma

I think it makes sense but can we document this in binding as well that
why people should use these two compatibles. I am fine with this being
comments here..

>        - items:
>            - enum:
>                - qcom,sdm670-gpi-dma
> -- 
> 2.34.1

-- 
~Vinod

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/10/2022 06:37, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 15-10-22, 10:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible,
>> so use one compatible fallback for all of them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
>> index 750b40c32213..0c2894498845 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
>> @@ -20,12 +20,14 @@ properties:
>>    compatible:
>>      oneOf:
>>        - enum:
>> -          - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
>>            - qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma
>>            - qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
>> -          - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
>> -          - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
>> -
>> +      - items:
>> +          - enum:
>> +              - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
>> +              - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
>> +              - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
>> +          - const: qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
> 
> I think it makes sense but can we document this in binding as well that
> why people should use these two compatibles. I am fine with this being
> comments here..

It is kind of implied (and maybe obvious) from the bindings - a list of
two items, one enum and one fallback compatible.

We usually do not document such patterns in the bindings with comments
for that reason. If you insist, I can add it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback

[Rob Herring]

On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 10:04:43 -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible,
> so use one compatible fallback for all of them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback

[Richard Acayan]

> Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible,
> so use one compatible fallback for all of them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
> index 750b40c32213..0c2894498845 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
> @@ -20,12 +20,14 @@ properties:
>    compatible:
>      oneOf:
>        - enum:
> -          - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
>            - qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma
>            - qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
> -          - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
> -          - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
> -

If you don't want this empty line here, you can still ask for it to be removed
in the original patch. It doesn't look like it was applied yet.

> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
> +              - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
> +              - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
> +          - const: qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
>        - items:
>            - enum:
>                - qcom,sdm670-gpi-dma
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: dma: qcom: gpi: use sm6350 fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/10/2022 17:10, Richard Acayan wrote:
>> Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible,
>> so use one compatible fallback for all of them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++----
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
>> index 750b40c32213..0c2894498845 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml
>> @@ -20,12 +20,14 @@ properties:
>>    compatible:
>>      oneOf:
>>        - enum:
>> -          - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma
>>            - qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma
>>            - qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
>> -          - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma
>> -          - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma
>> -
> 
> If you don't want this empty line here, you can still ask for it to be removed
> in the original patch. It doesn't look like it was applied yet.
> 

Sure.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 2/5] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Devices with ee offset of 0x10000 should rather bind with SM6350
compatible, so the list will not unnecessarily grow for compatible
devices.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
index f8e19e6e6117..061add832295 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
@@ -2286,13 +2286,14 @@ static int gpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 }
 
 static const struct of_device_id gpi_of_match[] = {
-	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
 	/*
-	 * Deprecated, devices with ee_offset = 0 should use sdm845-gpi-dma as
-	 * fallback and not need their own entries here.
+	 * Do not grow the list for compatible devices. Instead use
+	 * qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma (for ee_offset = 0x0) or qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
+	 * (for ee_offset = 0x10000).
 	 */
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8150-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8250-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding

[Richard Acayan]

> Devices with ee offset of 0x10000 should rather bind with SM6350
> compatible, so the list will not unnecessarily grow for compatible
> devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c | 7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
> index f8e19e6e6117..061add832295 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
> @@ -2286,13 +2286,14 @@ static int gpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  }
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id gpi_of_match[] = {
> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>  	/*
> -	 * Deprecated, devices with ee_offset = 0 should use sdm845-gpi-dma as
> -	 * fallback and not need their own entries here.

This comment is from the dependency series [1]. Why would we need to add it just
to remove it here? I was not notified that the dependency was applied anywhere
(except as a base for other series) so it's not set in stone. Let's just drop
the original patch that this comment originates from to prevent needlessly
adding and removing the same lines at once.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20221007213640.85469-4-mailingradian@gmail.com/

> +	 * Do not grow the list for compatible devices. Instead use
> +	 * qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma (for ee_offset = 0x0) or qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma
> +	 * (for ee_offset = 0x10000).
>  	 */
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8150-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8250-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/10/2022 17:23, Richard Acayan wrote:
>> Devices with ee offset of 0x10000 should rather bind with SM6350
>> compatible, so the list will not unnecessarily grow for compatible
>> devices.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c | 7 ++++---
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>> index f8e19e6e6117..061add832295 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>> @@ -2286,13 +2286,14 @@ static int gpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  }
>>  
>>  static const struct of_device_id gpi_of_match[] = {
>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>  	/*
>> -	 * Deprecated, devices with ee_offset = 0 should use sdm845-gpi-dma as
>> -	 * fallback and not need their own entries here.
> 
> This comment is from the dependency series [1]. Why would we need to add it just
> to remove it here? I was not notified that the dependency was applied anywhere
> (except as a base for other series) so it's not set in stone. Let's just drop
> the original patch that this comment originates from to prevent needlessly
> adding and removing the same lines at once.

I don't remove the comment, I re-phrase it to be better suited for final
code.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding

[Richard Acayan]

> On 17/10/2022 17:23, Richard Acayan wrote:
>>> Devices with ee offset of 0x10000 should rather bind with SM6350
>>> compatible, so the list will not unnecessarily grow for compatible
>>> devices.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c | 7 ++++---
>>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>> index f8e19e6e6117..061add832295 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>> @@ -2286,13 +2286,14 @@ static int gpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  static const struct of_device_id gpi_of_match[] = {
>>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>>  	/*
>>> -	 * Deprecated, devices with ee_offset = 0 should use sdm845-gpi-dma as
>>> -	 * fallback and not need their own entries here.
>> 
>> This comment is from the dependency series [1]. Why would we need to add it just
>> to remove it here? I was not notified that the dependency was applied anywhere
>> (except as a base for other series) so it's not set in stone. Let's just drop
>> the original patch that this comment originates from to prevent needlessly
>> adding and removing the same lines at once.
> 
> I don't remove the comment, I re-phrase it to be better suited for final
> code.

Yes, I didn't word that exactly right. I still think the patch that adds this is
now useless if it's just going to be replaced. Do you think I should keep the
patch that this comment originates from, even though we already know exactly how
its substantial contents will be replaced?

We can't modify history and drop commits on kernel trees, but I can still send
a v6 series that drops the original comment.

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/10/2022 18:00, Richard Acayan wrote:
>> On 17/10/2022 17:23, Richard Acayan wrote:
>>>> Devices with ee offset of 0x10000 should rather bind with SM6350
>>>> compatible, so the list will not unnecessarily grow for compatible
>>>> devices.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c | 7 ++++---
>>>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>>> index f8e19e6e6117..061add832295 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>>> @@ -2286,13 +2286,14 @@ static int gpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>>  static const struct of_device_id gpi_of_match[] = {
>>>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>>>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>>>  	/*
>>>> -	 * Deprecated, devices with ee_offset = 0 should use sdm845-gpi-dma as
>>>> -	 * fallback and not need their own entries here.
>>>
>>> This comment is from the dependency series [1]. Why would we need to add it just
>>> to remove it here? I was not notified that the dependency was applied anywhere
>>> (except as a base for other series) so it's not set in stone. Let's just drop
>>> the original patch that this comment originates from to prevent needlessly
>>> adding and removing the same lines at once.
>>
>> I don't remove the comment, I re-phrase it to be better suited for final
>> code.
> 
> Yes, I didn't word that exactly right. I still think the patch that adds this is
> now useless if it's just going to be replaced. Do you think I should keep the
> patch that this comment originates from, even though we already know exactly how
> its substantial contents will be replaced?
> 
> We can't modify history and drop commits on kernel trees, but I can still send
> a v6 series that drops the original comment.

Sure. You can make it then:

	 * Do not grow the list for compatible devices. Instead use
	 * qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma (for ee_offset = 0x0).

And my patch will just change one line.

We can also keep it like:

	 * Do not grow the list for compatible devices. Instead use
	 * proper fallback compatibles.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 2/5] dmaengine: qcom: gpi: document preferred SM6350 binding

[Richard Acayan]

> On 17/10/2022 18:00, Richard Acayan wrote:
>>> On 17/10/2022 17:23, Richard Acayan wrote:
>>>>> Devices with ee offset of 0x10000 should rather bind with SM6350
>>>>> compatible, so the list will not unnecessarily grow for compatible
>>>>> devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c | 7 ++++---
>>>>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>>>> index f8e19e6e6117..061add832295 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/gpi.c
>>>>> @@ -2286,13 +2286,14 @@ static int gpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>  }
>>>>>  
>>>>>  static const struct of_device_id gpi_of_match[] = {
>>>>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>>>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x0 },
>>>>>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma", .data = (void *)0x10000 },
>>>>>  	/*
>>>>> -	 * Deprecated, devices with ee_offset = 0 should use sdm845-gpi-dma as
>>>>> -	 * fallback and not need their own entries here.
>>>>
>>>> This comment is from the dependency series [1]. Why would we need to add it just
>>>> to remove it here? I was not notified that the dependency was applied anywhere
>>>> (except as a base for other series) so it's not set in stone. Let's just drop
>>>> the original patch that this comment originates from to prevent needlessly
>>>> adding and removing the same lines at once.
>>>
>>> I don't remove the comment, I re-phrase it to be better suited for final
>>> code.
>> 
>> Yes, I didn't word that exactly right. I still think the patch that adds this is
>> now useless if it's just going to be replaced. Do you think I should keep the
>> patch that this comment originates from, even though we already know exactly how
>> its substantial contents will be replaced?
>> 
>> We can't modify history and drop commits on kernel trees, but I can still send
>> a v6 series that drops the original comment.
> 
> Sure. You can make it then:
> 
> 	 * Do not grow the list for compatible devices. Instead use
> 	 * qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma (for ee_offset = 0x0).

If you don't want me to drop the original patch completely, then there is no
need to make any changes at all to the driver patches IMHO. I originally thought
we only needed one patch for the driver (yours) but you seem to have a really
good reason not to drop the original patch. Sorry for asking.

I guess you can add this if you want:

Acked-by: Richard Acayan <mailingradian@gmail.com>

> 
> And my patch will just change one line.
> 
> We can also keep it like:
> 
> 	 * Do not grow the list for compatible devices. Instead use
> 	 * proper fallback compatibles.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

[PATCH 3/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Use SM6350 as fallback for GPI DMA, to indicate devices are compatible
and that drivers can bind with only one compatible.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
index 212580316d3e..2a167412fa6a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
@@ -920,7 +920,7 @@ opp-384000000 {
 
 		gpi_dma0: dma-controller@900000 {
 			#dma-cells = <3>;
-			compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			reg = <0 0x00900000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 244 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
 				     <GIC_SPI 245 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
@@ -1419,7 +1419,7 @@ uart7: serial@99c000 {
 
 		gpi_dma1: dma-controller@a00000 {
 			#dma-cells = <3>;
-			compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			reg = <0 0x00a00000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 279 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
 				     <GIC_SPI 280 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 3/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

[Neil Armstrong]

On 15/10/2022 16:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Use SM6350 as fallback for GPI DMA, to indicate devices are compatible
> and that drivers can bind with only one compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>

[PATCH 4/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8350: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Use SM6350 as fallback for GPI DMA, to indicate devices are compatible
and that drivers can bind with only one compatible.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi
index a86d9ea93b9d..aa08c0e065c7 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi
@@ -678,7 +678,7 @@ ipcc: mailbox@408000 {
 		};
 
 		gpi_dma2: dma-controller@800000 {
-			compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			reg = <0 0x00800000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 588 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
 				     <GIC_SPI 589 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
@@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ spi19: spi@894000 {
 		};
 
 		gpi_dma0: dma-controller@900000 {
-			compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			reg = <0 0x09800000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 244 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
 				     <GIC_SPI 245 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
@@ -1209,7 +1209,7 @@ spi7: spi@99c000 {
 		};
 
 		gpi_dma1: dma-controller@a00000 {
-			compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			reg = <0 0x00a00000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 279 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
 				     <GIC_SPI 280 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 4/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8350: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

[Neil Armstrong]

On 15/10/2022 16:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Use SM6350 as fallback for GPI DMA, to indicate devices are compatible
> and that drivers can bind with only one compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350.dtsi | 6 +++---
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>

[PATCH 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8450: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Use SM6350 as fallback for GPI DMA, to indicate devices are compatible
and that drivers can bind with only one compatible.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi
index d32f08df743d..e01a019d8b23 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi
@@ -730,7 +730,7 @@ gcc: clock-controller@100000 {
 		};
 
 		gpi_dma2: dma-controller@800000 {
-			compatible = "qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			#dma-cells = <3>;
 			reg = <0 0x800000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 588 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
@@ -1058,7 +1058,7 @@ spi21: spi@898000 {
 		};
 
 		gpi_dma0: dma-controller@900000 {
-			compatible = "qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			#dma-cells = <3>;
 			reg = <0 0x900000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 244 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
@@ -1394,7 +1394,7 @@ uart7: serial@99c000 {
 		};
 
 		gpi_dma1: dma-controller@a00000 {
-			compatible = "qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma";
+			compatible = "qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma", "qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma";
 			#dma-cells = <3>;
 			reg = <0 0xa00000 0 0x60000>;
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 279 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8450: Add GPI DMA compatible fallback

[Neil Armstrong]

On 15/10/2022 16:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Use SM6350 as fallback for GPI DMA, to indicate devices are compatible
> and that drivers can bind with only one compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi | 6 +++---
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>