Hi Stephan and Vinod, On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 at 11:47, Stephan Gerhold <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:18:08AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 18-10-21, 12:24, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > > The BAM Data Multiplexer (BAM-DMUX) provides access to the network data > > > channels of modems integrated into many older Qualcomm SoCs, e.g. > > > Qualcomm MSM8916 or MSM8974. > > > > > > Shortly said, BAM-DMUX is built using a simple protocol layer on top of > > > a DMA engine (Qualcomm BAM DMA). For BAM-DMUX, the BAM DMA engine runs in > > > a special mode where the modem/remote side is responsible for powering > > > on the BAM when needed but we are responsible to initialize it. > > > The BAM is powered off when unneeded by coordinating power control > > > via bidirectional interrupts from the BAM-DMUX driver. > > > > > > This series adds one possible solution for handling the "powered remotely" > > > mode in the bam_dma driver. > > > > This looks good me me. Bhupesh/Stephan what was the conclusion on the > > the discussion you folks had? > > > > Basically I said I would wait if you still want to take this for 5.16. :) > There is a conflict with the DT schema conversion in Bhupesh's series, > but it's trivial to solve no matter which of the patches is applied first. > > Since Bhupesh still needs to send v5 as far as I can tell (and has a > much larger series overall), I think it's fine to apply this one first. > > Bhupesh, you can just copy-paste this below qcom,controlled-remotely > in your DT schema if Vinod applies this patch first: > > qcom,powered-remotely: > $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag > description: > Indicates that the bam is powered up by a remote processor > but must be initialized by the local processor. Sure, I can respin my v5 with 'qcom,powered-remotely' property added, if this series gets applied first. Can I add you S-o-B to the same? Thanks, Bhupesh
