From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 28E571DF268; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 22:25:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733264717; cv=none; b=tzJeEgcP3lHJN/Xl9//CHpCxg9ndNukWTTAwkoJVdk62xtvXCyiODw4zhfmT0W7ncRb7IoF61lxFMgFfg3QAgfRkCHDx6PEcH9g+80Dg3uWrsQCBWj3hft/9r53IIPIFFN799bpOMkRkHfF4i+RBSJ17+lWdWY7FupLCh/rK7dU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733264717; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z15C0mt3XM7YpivR1T5/W0M5swvKfGcdZ7nyxNwhLoQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZJ7TnyYwh3UlC9ONx6cJnCtV85XQSOGX6ZtzUwtgF64Ta2a5LA4ww2yjHJEadBznIYPEP61WacyMPI5bDTMclzkFSvYc8wMYHC/giJnaLeP5ILO0N7Qq0syxNv1npTsGiNLrm11qjIyad0JJu5DdX5zu3Vk/R3ieul2L+4k5PV8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=qhLj8p8e; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="qhLj8p8e" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 81806C4CEDC; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 22:25:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1733264716; bh=Z15C0mt3XM7YpivR1T5/W0M5swvKfGcdZ7nyxNwhLoQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=qhLj8p8eyWJXXP2R4fcik2XxZ1g4PpArVVeC4x2S0kXCH2O24HAt7vH4EuYcRZa9U agS0BM2aYhGkfRoh8AXjL7O1WEuoUtSxGq8aIPSUqUqT7p5kfpOKmj6WTOkNfWb6ae gesaNcOwa2CvKG0o081fcGYQyV1Aiw4aQQ57Md9Ffuda70Vw/Z/TP0AI/31q1JMnlr R4TnoXjduLP3en1w119e6ZYjMoLmpmNHSCdjvW4PMO4Sika9XCgkDNvThTj90uvqnI HFrNGoNAfsgTkVZtdnf4kK7COX0g/5hcp3ydpoWWf+O0KZ2vGTem5n36fzY7c/FExp rrf6y623PwJTQ== Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 16:25:15 -0600 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Christian Bruel , Rob Herring Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com, manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, bhelgaas@google.com, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, p.zabel@pengutronix.de, cassel@kernel.org, quic_schintav@quicinc.com, fabrice.gasnier@foss.st.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: PCI: Add STM32MP25 PCIe root complex bindings Message-ID: <20241203222515.GA2967814@bhelgaas> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241126155119.1574564-2-christian.bruel@foss.st.com> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 04:51:15PM +0100, Christian Bruel wrote: > Document the bindings for STM32MP25 PCIe Controller configured in > root complex mode. > > Supports 4 legacy interrupts and MSI interrupts from the ARM > GICv2m controller. s/legacy/INTx/ > STM32 PCIe may be in a power domain which is the case for the STM32MP25 > based boards. > > Supports wake# from wake-gpios s/wake#/WAKE#/ > + wake-gpios: > + description: GPIO controlled connection to WAKE# input signal I'm not a hardware guy, but this sounds like a GPIO that *reads* WAKE#, not controls it. > + pcie@48400000 { > + compatible = "st,stm32mp25-pcie-rc"; > + device_type = "pci"; > + num-lanes = <1>; num-lanes applies to a Root Port, not to a Root Complex. I know most bindings conflate Root Ports with the Root Complex, maybe because many of these controllers only support a single Root Port? But are we ever going to separate these out? I assume someday controllers will support multiple Root Ports and/or additional devices on the root bus, like RCiEPs, RCECs, etc., and we'll need per-RP phys, max-link-speed, num-lanes, reset-gpios, etc. Seems like it would be to our benefit to split out the Root Ports when we can, even if the current hardware only supports one, so we can start untangling the code and data structures. Bjorn