Hi, On 07/19/2017 09:49 AM, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 09:44:38AM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >> On Tue 18 Jul 02:58 PDT 2017, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 03:07:18PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >>>> On Mon 17 Jul 05:04 PDT 2017, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: >> [..] >>>> >>>> Can you confirm that this is actually version 4 of this block? Or are we >>>> just incrementing an arbitrary number here? >>> >>> This is not exactly the 4th version of the block. However, it is >>> a different version than the ones that are already supported in >>> this driver. Since the existing driver didn't exactly tie it with >>> the block IP version, I too followed the same versioning >>> convention. >>> >> >> Do you have a block IP version that you could base your numbering on, to >> break the trend? (We should go back and fix up the others as well) > > Presently, the driver supports the ipq8064, apq8064, apq8084, > msm8996, ipq4019 and ipq8074. The SoCs, qcom_pcie_ops version and > the block IP versions are as follows. > > ipq8064 - v0 - 2.1.0 > apq8064 - v0 - 2.1.0 > apq8084 - v1 - 1.0.0 > msm8996 - v2 - 2.3.2 > ipq4019 - v3 - 2.4.0 > ipq8074 - v4 - 2.3.3 That's nice, but I think we need the Synopsys IP versions too, can you provide such an information and after that we can decide how the names should look like. > > I will rename the qcom_pcie_ops structure and related functions > with the block IP version instead of vX numbering and post the > patch. regards, Stan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
