On 11.07.2023 08:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 11/07/2023 08:17, Rohit Agarwal wrote: >> >> On 7/11/2023 11:22 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 11/07/2023 07:42, Rohit Agarwal wrote: >>>> Add Generic RPMh Power Domain indexes that can be used >>>> for all the Qualcomm SoC henceforth. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Suggested-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000..4da2e04 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h >>> Filename based on compatible. >> This is not specific for SDX75. These are generic ones that should be >> used for all other targets. >> Konrad suggested in v1 to avoid target specific prefixes everytime and >> to create a new generic >> dt-bindings that can be reused. >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >>>> +/* >>>> + * Copyright (c) 2023, Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved. >>>> + */ >>>> + >>>> +#ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_POWER_QCOM_RPMHPD_H >>>> +#define _DT_BINDINGS_POWER_QCOM_RPMHPD_H >>>> + >>>> +/* Generic RPMH Power Domain Indexes */ >>>> +#define CX 0 >>> These are very generic names, usually not used in global headers. Please >>> use some reasonable prefix. >> This was based on the suggestion from Konrad in v2 to drop the RPMHPD >> prefix and we can go only with names like CX, etc. > > I don't think having so generic name in tree-wide header is good idea. Conversely, I think that it would be very clear in files including this header. Konrad > CX can mean anything. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
