Re: [PATCH 1/6] soc: qcom: Move some socinfo defines to the header, expand them

[Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>]

On 4/12/24 01:49, Elliot Berman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:24:08PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/11/24 22:09, Elliot Berman wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:05:30PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/11/24 20:55, Elliot Berman wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 10:41:29AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>>>> In preparation for parsing the chip "feature code" (FC) and "product
>>>>>> code" (PC) (essentially the parameters that let us conclusively
>>>>>> characterize the sillicon we're running on, including various speed
>>>>>> bins), move the socinfo version defines to the public header and
>>>>>> include some more FC/PC defines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
>>>>>> ---
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>
>>> 0xf is the last one.
>>
>> One more question, are the "internal/external feature codes" referring to
>> internality/externality of the chips (i.e. "are they QC-lab-only engineering
>> samples), or what else does that represent?
> 
> Yes, QC-lab-only engineering samples is the right interpretation of
> these feature codes.

Do you think it would be beneficial to keep the logic for these ESes in
the upstream GPU driver? Otherwise, I can yank out half of the added lines.

Konrad