Hi, On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 1:18 PM Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 08:08:09AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > 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... > > For GMU attached targets the GX power domain is mandatory assuming you want to > recover successfully from a hard GMU hang, that is. Sure. I guess we can quibble about whether this means optional or mandatory, but it won't gain much. ;-) ...seems like for now (assuming it works) we should at least specify it and put a <0>. Then we should make it a relatively high priority to get it hooked up more properly. -Doug
