From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fllv0016.ext.ti.com (fllv0016.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C67A913AC7; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 10:20:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="bhA03MLh" Received: from lelv0265.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.224]) by fllv0016.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 408AKOIA044815; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 04:20:24 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1704709224; bh=MZTcfKa0JGgjKosImq417HAF98o0lITE41SczYfrfg0=; h=Date:CC:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=bhA03MLhviuwXzRnTVzi8ydbZQZ/jJLbeSbDlFxebWw0VifD6Fs6A9eSoHgb59Sic qO0KcW3GJY/ePZFN5y/GuJKug1L4haDh3HYqhHrdxfPHJ85f+r9g65030Jm/vSkoEn CJ4ETLpSGobcqXLk/HwhjgA3yiDik4QdHMekZqkQ= Received: from DFLE102.ent.ti.com (dfle102.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.23]) by lelv0265.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 408AKObi012359 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 8 Jan 2024 04:20:24 -0600 Received: from DFLE107.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.28) by DFLE102.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 04:20:24 -0600 Received: from lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.249) by DFLE107.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 04:20:24 -0600 Received: from [172.24.227.9] (uda0492258.dhcp.ti.com [172.24.227.9]) by lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 408AKKJC108092; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 04:20:21 -0600 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:50:20 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird CC: , , , , , Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dt-bindings: PCI: ti,j721e-pci-host: Add device-id for TI's J784S4 SoC Content-Language: en-US To: Krzysztof Kozlowski , , , , , , References: <20240108050735.512445-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com> <67af1724-6424-456a-aff6-85d9e010c430@linaro.org> From: Siddharth Vadapalli In-Reply-To: <67af1724-6424-456a-aff6-85d9e010c430@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Hello Krzysztof, On 08/01/24 12:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 08/01/2024 06:07, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: >> Add the device-id of 0xb012 for the PCIe controller on the J784S4 SoC as >> described in the CTRL_MMR_PCI_DEVICE_ID register's PCI_DEVICE_ID_DEVICE_ID >> field. The Register descriptions and the Technical Reference Manual for >> J784S4 SoC can be found at: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/spruj52 >> >> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli >> --- >> >> This patch is based on linux-next tagged next-20240105. > > Why is this patch incomplete? What is missing here? What are you asking > about as RFC? Since the merge window is closed, I was hoping to get the patch reviewed in order to get any "Reviewed-by" tags if possible. That way, I will be able to post it again as v1 along with the tags when the merge window opens. For that reason, I have marked it as an RFC patch. Is there an alternative to this "RFC patch" method that I have followed? Please let me know. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > -- Regards, Siddharth.