Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom,sa8775p-pas: Document the SA8775p ADSP, CDSP and GPDSP

[Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@quicinc.com>]

On 5/27/2024 4:56 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/05/2024 10:43, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>
>> Document the components used to boot the ADSP, CDSP0, CDSP1, GPDSP0 and
>> GPDSP1 on the SA8775p SoC.
>>
>> Co-developed-by: Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@quicinc.com>
> 
> Missing SoB.
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> 
> ...
> 
> 
>> +
>> +allOf:
>> +  - $ref: /schemas/remoteproc/qcom,pas-common.yaml#
>> +
>> +  - if:
>> +      properties:
>> +        compatible:
>> +          enum:
>> +            - qcom,sa8775p-adsp-pas
>> +    then:
>> +      properties:
>> +        power-domains:
>> +          items:
>> +            - description: LCX power domain
>> +            - description: LMX power domain
>> +        power-domain-names:
>> +          items:
>> +            - const: lcx
>> +            - const: lmx
>> +
>> +  - if:
>> +      properties:
>> +        compatible:
>> +          enum:
>> +            - qcom,sa8775p-cdsp-pas
> 
> cdsp0
> 
>> +    then:
>> +      properties:
>> +        power-domains:
>> +          items:
>> +            - description: CX power domain
>> +            - description: MXC power domain
>> +            - description: NSP0 power domain
>> +        power-domain-names:
>> +          items:
>> +            - const: cx
>> +            - const: mxc
>> +            - const: nsp0
> 
> Shouldn't this be just nsp, so both cdsp0 and cdsp1 entries can be
> unified? That's the power domain from the device point of view, so the
> device expects to be in some NSP domain, not explicitly NSPn.
> 
Both cdsp0 and cdsp1 entries can uniformly use nsp.

> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

-- 
Thx and BRs,
Tengfei Fan