On 15/02/2024 10:32, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 11:29, Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 15/02/2024 10:25, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 11:20, Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Document the GPU SMMU found on the SM8650 platform.
Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
index a4042ae24770..3ad5c850f3bf 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
@@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ properties:
- qcom,sm8350-smmu-500
- qcom,sm8450-smmu-500
- qcom,sm8550-smmu-500
+ - qcom,sm8650-smmu-500
- const: qcom,adreno-smmu
- const: qcom,smmu-500
- const: arm,mmu-500
@@ -508,7 +509,10 @@ allOf:
- if:
properties:
compatible:
- const: qcom,sm8550-smmu-500
+ contains:
+ enum:
+ - qcom,sm8550-smmu-500
+ - qcom,sm8650-smmu-500
Doesn't this cause warnings for non-GPU SMMU on this platform?
No because it doesn't add those to required, it simply allows clock the properties.
Can we further constrain this branch so that it is applicable only to
the Adreno SMMUs (and enforce requirement)? And maybe constrain the
second if-branch so that it doesn't apply to the Adreno SMMUs?
Indeed, it's done like that for the a6 gpu, I'll send a fix for that
Neil
then:
properties:
clock-names:
@@ -544,7 +548,6 @@ allOf:
- qcom,sdx65-smmu-500
- qcom,sm6350-smmu-500
- qcom,sm6375-smmu-500
- - qcom,sm8650-smmu-500
- qcom,x1e80100-smmu-500
then:
properties:
--
2.34.1
