From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0b-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.180.131]) (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 E18515B217 for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.180.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710369668; cv=none; b=KmfaCixmyl8dZ3FQdQql66FEFePehK94xdgeI0AcgOfQXn2i8NQmdkrBk9qKKoxUMaduebOs4/z0HXkpILhMtpJ5WisG3URCH6hvt6KXsDd1tMz8mB2xPmrM1LPrnzg8m+ZnmY76Grv6k4FOoub49c8k2LeGP2udApnqcL903R4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710369668; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uw6Ae9+4FTL+l8wPsgiJnucIGWCSRqIvOzK52JAP9cQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=HntL0QuA4iHw+sYEfi77jaz7zAvgPYX3CUCZtIez/414QTm8QTG+Nirvd2V3SHj7Y8+dJf9iS6wj7HR5df8EVSQUijt8q3Qb4Heo68Dk+dMk57l0lWYql4qhqYufpGkWh8y0bBDgdSOVxbRAVbiaQ5Iq/KHzgN2fw/rFnMQprTs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quicinc.com header.i=@quicinc.com header.b=SoaLwdCI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.180.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=quicinc.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=quicinc.com header.i=@quicinc.com header.b="SoaLwdCI" Received: from pps.filterd (m0279870.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.24/8.17.1.24) with ESMTP id 42DEp3Of011147; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:40:54 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quicinc.com; h= message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references:from :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= qcppdkim1; bh=WUQEyhBudyITsPOzfVrA3lmTUxRNo7WtKjVlIUvl+DQ=; b=So aLwdCIRi50MxBGKtkYpds+0TRMrz6bENsb/uiYotSDlmd1FCA/qKSYGE5XTf4Nrq GCNYCu1pV9yw/uNuKhWbtV2w1cKgCeUGwUDE7buYc5GfRdEPQNJgkXop/A/rccwH kLJMVNzgMnnNWnXSyOZIKaTrWsx4MZizcLf/F44GpX14qzkKryjpmn05KI8iM72n RkuO0t1xGKS4K2815Zqpd66ygB6O99WIdsvvrL38AFteIwcVjYWaHgdrA7Tlbb76 MpvwSnAyQCPIBczUywimO4/dDaYjNwsbzmAzx321leYwaPbusGAXrMp/r33U2uHe o9RHFWImCqNm6l7+2vmA== Received: from nasanppmta02.qualcomm.com (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3wub3nhjds-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:40:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com [10.52.223.231]) by NASANPPMTA02.qualcomm.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTPS id 42DMeqXi000669 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 Mar 2024 22:40:52 GMT Received: from [10.110.34.198] (10.80.80.8) by nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.52.223.231) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.40; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:40:51 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:40:51 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1 Subject: Re: DT Query on "New Compatible vs New Property" Content-Language: en-US To: Srinivas Kandagatla , Nikunj Kela , Sudeep Holla , Ulf Hansson CC: Krzysztof Kozlowski , "Manivannan Sadhasivam" , , Vincent Guittot , , , , "Prasad Sodagudi (QUIC)" References: <32092ee9-018f-4cfb-950e-26c69764f35a@quicinc.com> <94a62a78-961a-4286-804c-fc0b9098b8a1@quicinc.com> <20240228140239.gkzcytw6cmb4opja@bogus> <799268ac-7ffb-4b99-b037-d5bb93d37f13@linaro.org> <20240228160925.fcitj2yz7hisidsl@bogus> <2b0a11f4-f54e-461c-91e7-8f313d91abe8@linaro.org> <321069a8-2c46-4871-b85a-5e9cbdda5b5d@quicinc.com> <3aad2e6b-88fd-06ab-95c5-d07f012e8306@quicinc.com> <989dee90-9c44-09b9-6940-687082109ae7@quicinc.com> From: Trilok Soni In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.141.250) To nasanex01a.na.qualcomm.com (10.52.223.231) X-QCInternal: smtphost X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=5800 signatures=585085 X-Proofpoint-GUID: YYOMKbqCknMFW5XLmx6RWvUIR_o7HSGU X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: YYOMKbqCknMFW5XLmx6RWvUIR_o7HSGU X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.272,Aquarius:18.0.1011,Hydra:6.0.619,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-03-13_09,2024-03-13_01,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2402120000 definitions=main-2403130172 On 3/13/2024 4:49 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > On 12/03/2024 17:25, Trilok Soni wrote: >> On 3/12/2024 10:21 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >>> >>>> Basically, I would prefer better than "qcom, fw-managed" since this is not >>>> a qcom specific problem. >>> >>> >>> We already have something like this in mainline where the BAM DMA controller is remotely powered. >>> >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,bam-dma.yaml?h=v6.8 >>> >> >> As you can see it is already fragmented. Why we need to create one more approach >> which is not scalable and specific to SOC vendor? > > The whole issue around this new checks is that the driver/binding is not designed to expect same set of resources from different TYPES of providers. > If the driver was designed to support opp's and power domains and make the resources handle in a unified way then some/all of these changes will naturally fit in. > > >> >> SCMI or RPMI based firmware is not a QC specific. I also have allergic reaction > > I agree this are not QC specific, am fine with generic dt-binding like firmware-managed-resources or something on those lines if DT-maintainers are happy with. > > What is your suggestion? Yes, DT-spec will be a good start. > > >> when I see drivers modified w/ if (fw_managed) {..} but that is a discussion > > I don't think we have a choice here, either we do this check at compatible level or dt-property level or resource level in every drivers. I don't understand yet why we don't have any other choices but do the conditional checks? Maybe explaining with the example will help? Start w/ clocks? -- ---Trilok Soni