On 26/04/2024 17:00, Eddie James wrote: > > On 4/26/24 01:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 25/04/2024 23:36, Eddie James wrote: >>> The FSI2PIB or SCOM engine provides an interface to the POWER processor >>> PIB (Pervasive Interconnect Bus). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml | 38 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 000000000000..4d557150c2e3 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml >>> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) >>> +%YAML 1.2 >>> +--- >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml# >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>> + >>> +title: IBM FSI-attached SCOM engine >>> + >>> +maintainers: >>> + - Eddie James <eajames@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> + >>> +description: >>> + The SCOM engine is an interface to the POWER processor PIB (Pervasive >>> + Interconnect Bus). This node will always be a child of an FSI CFAM node; >>> + see fsi.txt for details on FSI slave and CFAM nodes. >>> + >>> +properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + enum: >>> + - ibm,fsi2pib >>> + - ibm,i2cr-scom >> Sometimes you call these p9, sometimes p10... what is the system or SoC >> here? Aren't you adding some generic compatibles? writing-bindings and >> numerous guides are clear on that. > > > Open source FSI support started with P9 chips so we initially added > p9-sbefifo, p9-occ, etc. P10 has all of the same engines as P9 plus the > SPI controller, so that's why SPI is p10-spi. P11 has the same engines > as P10. For scom/fsi2pib we could call it p9-scom I suppose... This > series isn't just documentation for a new system, I'm adding > documentation that should have been added for P9. Anyway I'm not sure > what you mean about generic compatibles? You mean just add a "scom" or > "fsi2pib" compatible? writing-bindings says "DO make 'compatible' > properties specific" Usually it means that parts of SoC must have the name of the SoC, as first component of the name. Your boards are a bit different here, because I suppose no one will ever make a product except you, but still code could follow same set of rules. Best regards, Krzysztof
