On 29.12.2022 11:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/12/2022 11:32, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Add the spmi bus as found in the SM8450 SoC
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> [Konrad: 0x0 -> 0, move #cells down, make reg-names a vertical list]
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> v1 -> v2:
>> No changes
>>
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi
>> index 570475040d95..b9b59c5223eb 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi
>> @@ -2715,6 +2715,28 @@ aoss_qmp: power-controller@c300000 {
>> #clock-cells = <0>;
>> };
>>
>> + spmi_bus: spmi@c42d000 {
>
> Hmm looks different than reg.
>
>> + compatible = "qcom,spmi-pmic-arb";
>> + reg = <0 0x0c400000 0 0x00003000>,
>> + <0 0x0c500000 0 0x00400000>,
>> + <0 0x0c440000 0 0x00080000>,
>> + <0 0x0c4c0000 0 0x00010000>,
>> + <0 0x0c42d000 0 0x00010000>;
> x
Hm, my guess would be that Vinod chose to put the "cnfg" reg
instead of "core" in the unit address, as 8450 has 2 SPMI bus
hosts and they both share the core reg, so it would have been
impossible to have two spmi@core nodes..
Konrad
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
