Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: memory: tegra264: Add full set of MC client IDs

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The macros for the XUSB HOST memory clients are incorrectly named as `XUSB_DEV`.
--

commit f7f5816878d7a2d26ed25199c9ab18008b75aa76
Author: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@nvidia.com>

dt-bindings: memory: tegra264: Add full set of MC client IDs

This commit adds the complete set of TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_* IDs
exposed by the Tegra264 memory controller.

> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/memory/nvidia,tegra264.h b/include/dt-bindings/memory/nvidia,tegra264.h
> index 521405c01f84c..c65403a764134 100644
> --- a/include/dt-bindings/memory/nvidia,tegra264.h
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/memory/nvidia,tegra264.h
[ ... ]
> @@ -108,16 +194,140 @@
>  #define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_PCIE5R		0xe2
>  /* PCIE5/DMX4 Write clients */
>  #define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_PCIE5W		0xe3
[ ... ]
>  /* UFS Read client */
>  #define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_UFSR		0x15c
>  /* UFS write client */
>  #define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_UFSW		0x15d
> +/* XUSB HOST Read Client */
> +#define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_XUSB_DEVR	0x166
> +/* XUSB HOST Write Client */
> +#define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_XUSB_DEVW	0x167

Should these macros be named TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_XUSB_HOSTR and
TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_XUSB_HOSTW instead?

The inline comments document them as XUSB HOST clients, but the macro names
use DEV. Previous Tegra generations typically separate the host and device
endpoints using HOSTR/HOSTW and DEVR/DEVW.

Since device tree bindings constitute public ABI, could using DEV for the
host endpoints cause confusion for future drivers mapping the interconnect
paths?

> +/* XUSB SS0 Read Client */
> +#define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_XUSB_DEV1R	0x168
> +/* XUSB SS1 Write Client */
> +#define TEGRA264_MEMORY_CLIENT_XUSB_DEV2W	0x169
[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260518124306.2071481-1-sumitg@nvidia.com?part=2