From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 10/16] dt-bindings: PCI: tegra: Add device tree support for T194 Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 10:20:50 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20190424052004.6270-1-vidyas@nvidia.com> <20190424052004.6270-11-vidyas@nvidia.com> <20190426154306.GA16455@bogus> <504abd8f-9eb3-1089-953c-a6372c34b346@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <504abd8f-9eb3-1089-953c-a6372c34b346@nvidia.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vidya Sagar Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi , Bjorn Helgaas , Mark Rutland , Thierry Reding , Jon Hunter , Kishon Vijay Abraham I , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Jingoo Han , Gustavo Pimentel , Mikko Perttunen , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" , kthota@nvidia.com, Manikanta Maddireddy , sagar List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 4:20 AM Vidya Sagar wrote: > > On 4/26/2019 9:13 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:49:58AM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote: > >> Add support for Tegra194 PCIe controllers. These controllers are based > >> on Synopsys DesignWare core IP. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Vidya Sagar > >> --- > >> +- nvidia,bpmp: Must contain a phandle to BPMP controller node. > >> +- nvidia,controller-id : Controller specific ID > >> + 0: C0 > >> + 1: C1 > >> + 2: C2 > >> + 3: C3 > >> + 4: C4 > >> + 5: C5 > > > > We don't normal put device indexes into DT. Why do you need this. > > Perhaps for accessing the BPMP? If so, make nvidia,bpmp a phandle+cell. > BPMP needs to know the controller number to enable it hence it needs to be > passed to BPMP. Just for accessing BPMP, I already added 'nvidia,bpmp' property. Then make nvidia,bpmp take the phandle and this number. > >> +- nvidia,disable-aspm-states: Controls advertisement of ASPM states > >> + bit-0 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L0s > >> + bit-1 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L1. This also disables > >> + advertisement of ASPM-L1.1 and ASPM-L1.2 > >> + bit-2 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L1.1 > >> + bit-3 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L1.2 > > > > Can't this cover what 'supports-clkreq' does? > Well, they are related partially. i.e. if a platform doesn't have 'supports-clkreq' set, > then, by definition, it can't advertise support for ASPM L1.1 and L1.2 states. But, ASPM-L0s > and ASPM-L1 states don't depend on 'supports-clkreq' property. > Having this property gives more granularity as to support for which particular ASPM state > shouldn't be advertised by the root port. Okay, then it should be a common property then. Rob