On 18/11/2023 00:38, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 3.11.2023 13:29, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
Right now we use fixed indexes to assign power-domains, with a
requirement for the TOP GDSC to come last in the list.
Adding support for named power-domains means the declaration in the dtsi
can come in any order.
After this change we continue to support the old indexing - if a SoC
resource declaration or the in-use dtb doesn't declare power-domain names
we fall back to the default legacy indexing.
From this point on though new SoC additions should contain named
power-domains, eventually we will drop support for legacy indexing.
Tested-by: Matti Lehtimäki <matti.lehtimaki@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
rg -l "&cc.* \{" arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom # (the bus is named cci or cciN)
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm7225-fairphone-fp4.dts
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-db845c-navigation-mezzanine.dts
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8016-sbc-d3-camera-mezzanine.dts
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb5165-rb5-vision-mezzanine.dts
the FP4 only has bus enablements (i.e. no attached sensors)
the number of working DB845c/RB3s is probably single-digit today
410c and rb5 are probably legit users.. part of me would like to
get rid of this messy old binding ASAP.. but then are there really
non-Bryans with these boards and the camera mezzs?
Konrad
The plan here is to follow the procedures as I understand them.
- Deprecate
- Wait a reasonable amount of time ~ 1 year or so
- Drop
We could go faster but, there's no need. Drawing a line on new SoCs and
deprecating the old way will do fine.
---
bod
