From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204C6C2D0DB for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 16:16:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEB1120720 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 16:16:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="cmmShzgt" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726781AbgA2QQv (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 11:16:51 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-f65.google.com ([209.85.167.65]:44232 "EHLO mail-lf1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726715AbgA2QQv (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 11:16:51 -0500 Received: by mail-lf1-f65.google.com with SMTP id v201so57428lfa.11; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 08:16:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ok8Ji8SqnJ445zZBSASQHbGoPp4FTjkHx85GL6b9wuI=; b=cmmShzgtfQJkGQNr6q5LeLI2k8hMvzEBNcvLq2aGp4vccimkfgnyL9aIAO7+W2E+H6 Zq2QCvbi3FgWxwSyvvOz/oLvCzabm5cTIKTA93RMkzEubAUFKb0VBz2NiVxo1fE4vUd6 5P/3henEH/HA6OvIN4EA4pF4bigepVZo6cB0yQfUtmXGezANdFZYEW9/XMuRQFB9z6tv lx/2uOpZbWRVP/urEisTj07R5hnuAY9wSxGaoglfgJ/4HdemudP9515jaE+VsYn6WXTx T/9nPfiY1r7VHqd3cWfq2Dqjwnxz7mUjWqjfd/LJzR/vQrTwCUNDikkTuQF9X13jW3u7 ZlBg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ok8Ji8SqnJ445zZBSASQHbGoPp4FTjkHx85GL6b9wuI=; b=sPj2jGi50iiHJ22UKxh7DJG0uPLsDcy2WKr+wlisGjgihzIDo/XHjCdbUl9p6fSgFh 8LKqwRKEMpeFbNMgr7XEWhQchu27mhD8ER0cdqyCJtKWXYy1OFOm1MljDqtFZJpP6H81 5YaxyDY+egUdSzCNn9pmPY3r886y1FxY8Ah0tLgAzI4czVXewpyupSn96uLk/XCBf8Wp in2KEy/E+fhInXe16Ht8QN47L1IE36AS+N/qUT9p4OYx06f2SpsKFp+wP5QeFKHNkw7w hDsu+Z59YiMP+iAGHGCT6OwAhgYiJu7tTwd5acurwFtMtAGc7rgFwMpNisLoK7D/grW4 Bkew== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWpQXTjPqCyQ+yzYJGXhbLw03Z04oW08Lp2vONge8lvK390WIZ/ Zr31ivR5Fwh1SqmriSaA1RTRvyS2 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy8G1MXLOIC0kplXoL51g1VYStBeAb3j5Ma85aHR2fXk3IHsw6FQNYfBOXqrDCjbd1ZiJjQjQ== X-Received: by 2002:a19:c697:: with SMTP id w145mr67524lff.54.1580314608198; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 08:16:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.145] (79-139-233-37.dynamic.spd-mgts.ru. [79.139.233.37]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 11sm1237336lju.103.2020.01.29.08.16.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Jan 2020 08:16:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] dt-bindings: firmware: tegra186-bpmp: Document interconnects property To: Georgi Djakov , Thierry Reding Cc: Rob Herring , Jon Hunter , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org References: <20200114181519.3402385-2-thierry.reding@gmail.com> <7aefac6c-092c-b5a6-2fa6-e283d2147fc3@linaro.org> <20200120150605.GA712203@ulmo> <57c37b3c-1473-d444-db59-8c6650241188@gmail.com> <20200121141027.GE899558@ulmo> <83d94918-bc01-131b-924c-9750767d3b29@linaro.org> <20200121155432.GA912205@ulmo> <20200127122115.GA2117209@ulmo> <20200129093602.GC2479935@ulmo> <0b8692ab-4e06-b277-bbe2-93922e47c2f6@gmail.com> <7db91ca2-6ef7-7161-6ec9-f69a8d8d8a34@linaro.org> From: Dmitry Osipenko Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:16:46 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7db91ca2-6ef7-7161-6ec9-f69a8d8d8a34@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org 29.01.2020 19:13, Georgi Djakov пишет: > On 1/29/20 18:02, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> 29.01.2020 12:36, Thierry Reding пишет: >>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 10:27:00PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>> 27.01.2020 15:21, Thierry Reding пишет: >>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:12:11PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>> 21.01.2020 18:54, Thierry Reding пишет: >>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 05:18:43PM +0200, Georgi Djakov wrote: >>>>>>>> On 1/21/20 16:10, Thierry Reding wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>> I'm not sure if that TEGRA_ICC_EMEM makes a lot of sense. It's always >>>>>>>>> going to be the same and it's arbitrarily defined, so it's effectively >>>>>>>>> useless. But other than that it looks good. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, in most cases the target would be the EMEM, so that's fine. I have seen >>>>>>>> that other vendors that may have an additional internal memory, especially >>>>>>>> dedicated to some DSPs and in such cases the bandwidth needs are different for >>>>>>>> the two paths (to internal memory and DDR). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Most chips have a small internal memory that can be used, though it >>>>>>> seldomly is. However, in that case I would expect the target to be a >>>>>>> completely different device, so it'd look more like this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> interconnects = <&mc TEGRA186_MEMORY_CLIENT_BPMPR &iram>, >>>>>>> ...; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think EMEM has any "downstream" other than external memory. >>>>>> >>>>>> The node ID should be mandatory in terms of interconnect, even if it's a >>>>>> single node. EMC (provider) != EMEM (endpoint). >>>>> >>>>> I don't understand why. An ID only makes sense if you've got multiple >>>>> endpoints. For example, a regulator is a provider with a single endpoint >>>>> so we don't specify an ID. >>>> >>>> Because this is how ICC binding is defined, unless I'm missing something. >>> >>> I don't think so. It's defined as "pairs of phandles and interconnect >>> provider specifiers", which is equivalent to what pretty much all of the >>> resource bindings define. The #interconnect-cells property defines the >>> number of cells used for the specifier. In the normal case this would be >>> 1, and the value of the one cell would be the ID of the endpoint. But if >>> there's only a single endpoint, it's customary to set the number of >>> cells to 0, in which case only the phandle is required. >> >> Right, setting interconnect-cells=0 should work. I'll give it a try, >> thank you! > > Yes, it's fine to have #interconnect-cells = <0>. Here is a patch [1] which is a > bit related to this. > > Thanks, > Georgi > > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11305295/ Georgi, thank you very much! This patch will be handy!