On 11/4/2024 3:05 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 4.11.2024 7:40 AM, Raviteja Laggyshetty wrote: >> >> >> On 11/1/2024 12:26 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 12:23:57PM +0530, Raviteja Laggyshetty wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/26/2024 8:15 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 12:30:56PM +0000, Raviteja Laggyshetty wrote: >>>>>> Add Epoch Subsystem (EPSS) L3 interconnect provider binding on >>>>>> SA8775P SoCs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Raviteja Laggyshetty <quic_rlaggysh@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.yaml | 4 ++++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.yaml >>>>>> index 21dae0b92819..042ca44c32ec 100644 >>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.yaml >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.yaml >>>>>> @@ -34,6 +34,10 @@ properties: >>>>>> - qcom,sm8250-epss-l3 >>>>>> - qcom,sm8350-epss-l3 >>>>>> - const: qcom,epss-l3 >>>>>> + - items: >>>>>> + - enum: >>>>>> + - qcom,sa8775p-epss-l3 >>>>>> + - const: qcom,epss-l3-perf >>>>> >>>>> Why is it -perf? What's so different about it? >>>> >>>> The EPSS instance in SA8775P uses PERF_STATE register instead of REG_L3_VOTE to scale L3 clocks. >>>> So adding new generic compatible "qcom,epss-l3-perf" for PERF_STATE register based l3 scaling. >>> >>> Neither sm8250 nor sc7280 use this compatible, while they also use >>> PERF_STATE register. >>> >> That is correct, both sm8250 and sc7280 use perf state register. >> The intention for adding "qcom,epss-l3-perf" generic compatible is to use it for the chipsets which use perf state register for l3 scaling. >> Using generic compatible avoids the need for adding chipset specific compatible in match table. > > That is exactly what bindings guidelines forbid. > > You need a SoC-specific compatible so that you can address platform- > specific quirks that may arise in the future while keeping backwards > compatibility with older device trees > > Konrad Got it, I will add both SoC-Specific and generic compatibles in the driver match table in next patch revision.
