Re: [PATCH v8 5/9] dt-bindings: qcom-qce: document clocks and clock-names as optional

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 10/02/2023 12:12, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> On 2/7/23 01:45, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 02/02/2023 18:16, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>> On 2/2/23 16:21, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> On 02/02/2023 15:04, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/2/23 15:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 02/02/2023 14:50, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On certain Snapdragon processors, the crypto engine clocks are
>>>>>>> enabled by
>>>>>>> default by security firmware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then probably we should not require them only on these variants.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't have the exact list of the affected SoCs, I believe Neil can
>>>>> provide
>>>>> such a list, if you find it crucial.
>>>>
>>>> It's the case for SM8350, SM8450 & SM8550.
>>>>
>>>
>>> On SM8250 there is no QCE clocks also, so I'll add it to the list, and I
>>> hope
>>> that now the list is complete.
>>>
>>> It could be that the relevant platforms are the ones with
>>> 'qcom,no-clock-support'
>>> property of QCE in the downstream.
>>>
>>
>> Then, sc7180, sc8180x, sdx55, sm6150, sm7150, sm8150 also have this
>> property in QCE device. And, I think, it should also be applicable to
>> sc7280 and sc8280xp.
> 
> So maybe do you have a better candidate among the SoCs for a QCE IP family
> name than SM8150 based? Likely it could be the first released SoC among
> mentioned above.

If you have access to the docs, you will see clear mapping of version to
the SoCs. Just choose the oldest SoC from the list (or something looking
as the oldest - there is no need to be very accurate).


Best regards,
Krzysztof