On 12.07.2023 22:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 11/07/2023 14:18, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> In order to (at least partially) untangle the global BCM voter lookup >> (as again, they are shared throughout the entire system and not bound to >> individual buses/providers), introduce a new required property to assign >> a unique identifier to each BCM voter. >> >> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,bcm-voter.yaml | 10 ++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,bcm-voter.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,bcm-voter.yaml >> index eec987640b37..09321c1918bf 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,bcm-voter.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,bcm-voter.yaml >> @@ -38,8 +38,14 @@ properties: >> >> $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 >> >> + qcom,bcm-voter-idx: >> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array >> + description: >> + A globally unique predefined discrimnator, identifying each BCM voter. > > s/each/this/ ? Right, this makes more sense > If I understand correctly, there might be more than one instance. The > problem is that I cannot find such case in upstream sources. I don't think there can be more than one per RSC. SM8550 splits some RSCs into "channels" and these channels have their individual voters, however they would still be attached to these channel subnodes/subdevices and no, we don't support that yet. > > >> + >> required: >> - compatible >> + - qcom,bcm-voter-idx > > This should not be really required, because it affects the ABI. Hm.. can I deprecate lack of it somehow? > You also > need to fix the reported warning. Ack Konrad > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
