On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 at 19:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 16/03/2023 07:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 14/03/2023 13:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >> On 14/03/2023 10:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Changes since v1 > >>> ================ > >>> 1. Rebase > >>> 2. Make msm8994 fallback for several variants, not msm8953, because the latter > >>> actually might take some clocks. > >> > >> Although the approach looks correct, I think that in some cases it tries > >> to mark devices compatible judging from the current driver, not from the > >> hardware itself. > > > > Which is what compatibility is about... Well, I was trying to say that once we update the driver, the devices will not be compatible. But probably our definitions of being compatible differ. > > > >> > >> For the reference, on msm8994 the apcs is a clock controller for the l2 > >> clocks (which we do not support yet). If I'm not mistaken, on msm8976 > >> the apcs region contains a mux for the cluster1 clocks. On sdm630/660 > >> the apcs region also seems to be involved in CPU clocks scaling. > > > > The question is this means they are incompatible? > > Since there are no more comments I assume they are actually compatible > in the terms of SW interface. -- With best wishes Dmitry
