On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 03:10:33PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 8.01.2025 2:02 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 05:28:43PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >> Allow an SoC driver to probe for these devices. Add the SoC specific
> >> compatible to the soc node. Leave the original simple-bus compatible in
> >> place so that everything keeps working.
> >>
> >> Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: <linux-arm-msm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi
> >> index 76fe314d2ad5..257890a193e6 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi
> >> @@ -782,7 +782,7 @@ soc: soc@0 {
> >> #size-cells = <2>;
> >> ranges = <0 0 0 0 0x10 0>;
> >> dma-ranges = <0 0 0 0 0x10 0>;
> >> - compatible = "simple-bus";
> >> + compatible = "qcom,soc-sc7180", "simple-bus";
> >
> > If the new driver requires this compatible, it will break compatibility
> > with older DT files (and it should be avoided).
>
> IIUC the intent here is to provide backwards compatibility through checking
> for sth like IS_SOCPM_MANAGED(), sorta like HAS_ACPI_COMPANION(). In that
> case, power sequencing would be done by the socpm driver, whereas if it
> doesn't hold, the resources would be toggled by the device driver
I think that this way we end up having PM code both in the device driver
and in the socpm. Ideally in my opinion we should be able to migrate all
pm code to socpm, keeping compat with old DT files. In the end, if this
is the only change to the SoC.dtsi, then we should be able to live
without this compat change.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
