Hi, On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 4:16 AM <smasetty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> + reg = <0 0x0506a000 0 0x31000>, <0 0x0b290000 > >> 0 0x10000>, > >> + <0 0x0b490000 0 0x10000>; > >> + reg-names = "gmu", "gmu_pdc", "gmu_pdc_seq"; > >> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 304 > >> IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, > >> + <GIC_SPI 305 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > >> + interrupt-names = "hfi", "gmu"; > >> + clocks = <&gpucc GPU_CC_CX_GMU_CLK>, > >> + <&gpucc GPU_CC_CXO_CLK>, > >> + <&gcc GCC_DDRSS_GPU_AXI_CLK>, > >> + <&gcc GCC_GPU_MEMNOC_GFX_CLK>; > >> + clock-names = "gmu", "cxo", "axi", "memnoc"; > >> + power-domains = <&gpucc CX_GDSC>; > > > > Bindings claim that you need both CX and GC. Is sc7180 somehow > > different? Bindings also claim that you should be providing > > power-domain-names. > No this is still needed, We need the GX power domain for GPU recovery > use cases where the shutdown was not successful. This almost sounds as if the bindings should mark the GX power domain as optional? The driver can function without it but doesn't get all the features? As the binding is written right now I think it is "invalid" to not specify a a GX power domain and once the yaml conversion is done then it will even be flagged as an error. That's going to make it harder to land the your patch... > I am working the Taniya > to get the dependencies sorted out to bring this change in. This should > be > okay for the time being. What breaks today if you add in the GX power domain here? Oh, I see. It's not even provided by the 'gpucc-sc7180.c' file. What happens if you do this for now: power-domains = <&gpucc CX_GDSC>, <0>; power-domain-names = "cx", "gx"; That seems to be the trendy thing to do if a phandle to something is "required" but the code isn't ready for it. -Doug
