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!
