On 04/01/2024 11:55, Fenglin Wu wrote: > > > On 1/4/2024 6:49 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 at 12:41, Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 1/4/2024 6:32 PM, Robert Marko wrote: >>>> >>>> On 04. 01. 2024. 11:16, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>>>> On 4.01.2024 11:13, Fenglin Wu wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1/4/2024 5:53 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 at 10:06, Fenglin Wu via B4 Relay >>>>>>> <devnull+quic_fenglinw.quicinc.com@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>> From: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Property '#power-domain-cells' is required as per defined in >>>>>>>> qcom,gcc.yaml >>>>>>>> so add it for ipq6018 gcc device node to eliminate following >>>>>>>> warning in >>>>>>>> dtbs_check: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018-cp01-c1.dtb: gcc@1800000: >>>>>>>> '#power-domain-cells' is a required property >>>>>>>> from schema $id: >>>>>>>> http://devicetree.org/schemas/clock/qcom,gcc-ipq6018.yaml# >>>>>>> But ipq6018 doesn't implement GDSC support. So for the sake of fixing >>>>>>> the warning you are adding a bogus property. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I agree. However, there are also some gcc drivers not implementing >>>>>> GDSC support but the bindings are adding '#power-domain-cells' in the >>>>>> DT example, such as: qcom,gcc-apq8064.yaml, qcom,gcc-ipq4019.yaml, >>>>>> qcom,gcc-ipq6018.yaml, qcom,gcc-ipq8064.yaml, qcom,gcc-msm8660.yaml. >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually I thought that maybe we should do a clean up by removing >>>>>> '#power-domain-cells' out of the qcom,gcc.yaml binding and only >>>>>> adding it into individual qcom,gcc-xxx.yaml for the driver which has >>>>>> implemented GDSC support. I checked this with Taniya offline, but she >>>>>> prefers only fixing it in ipq6018.dtsi as it doesn't hurt anything by >>>>>> adding the property, and she expects the GDSC support should be >>>>>> existing in most of qcom,gcc drivers especially the newer Qcom chipsets. >>>>> Before we start changing anything, we should assess whether these >>>>> platforms actually have GDSCs within this clock controller block, >>>>> even if they are (currently) not described in the clk driver. >>>> Hi, >>>> IPQ6018 has GDSC-s, at least for the USB-s. >>>> I tried configuring them a while ago, but the USB2.0 GDSC seems to >>>> either have a HW bug or >>>> it uses some special configuration as its status bits never show that >>>> its ON [1]. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/20231025104457.628109-2-robimarko@xxxxxxxxx/ >>>> >>> Thanks for the link! I checked the spec internal, and I did see GDSC >>> device for USB0/USB1 controller is present in GCC clock controller. >>> So considering there is a patch ongoing to add GDSC device for ipq6018 >>> gcc driver, can the DT commit which adds '#power-domain-cells' be accepted? >> >> What for? > Maria (quic_aiquny@xxxxxxxxxxx, copied) is working on automation tool in > Qcom internally to check dt_binding and dtbs and she expects all the Check existing tree is trivial, I had something running months ago. Unless you meant checking patches before you send them? > warnings/errors reported on Qcom board files can be fixed. She can help > to comment further. Anyway, fixing something incorrectly just because your tool cannot handle existing issues, is not the reason. Best regards, Krzysztof
