On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 11:20:30AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
[..]
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi
> index 90a6d4b7605c..ada232bed2c8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi
> @@ -1189,7 +1189,7 @@ remoteproc_mss: remoteproc@fc880000 {
> resets = <&gcc GCC_MSS_RESTART>;
> reset-names = "mss_restart";
>
> - qcom,halt-regs = <&tcsr_mutex_block 0x1180 0x1200 0x1280>;
> + qcom,halt-regs = <&tcsr_1 0x180 0x200 0x280>;
>
> qcom,smem-states = <&modem_smp2p_out 0>;
> qcom,smem-state-names = "stop";
> @@ -1230,10 +1230,15 @@ smd-edge {
>
> tcsr_mutex_block: syscon@fd484000 {
> compatible = "syscon";
> - reg = <0xfd484000 0x2000>;
> + reg = <0xfd484000 0x1000>;
> };
>
> - tcsr: syscon@fd4a0000 {
> + tcsr_1: syscon@fd485000 {
While the accessed registers look general purpose in nature, I would
prefer that we stick with naming it based on the register blocks - and
this is part of what's named "tcsr_mutex".
Is it not possible to claim that this region is a
"qcom,msm8974-tcsr-mutex" and a "syscon"?
> + compatible = "qcom,tcsr-msm8974", "syscon";
> + reg = <0xfd485000 0x1000>;
> + };
> +
> + tcsr_2: syscon@fd4a0000 {
And I would like to keep this as "tcsr".
Regards,
Bjorn
