On 2021-02-27 19:26, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
On 2021-02-27 00:16, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Sai Prakash Ranjan (2021-02-25 23:51:00)
On 2021-02-26 01:11, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Sai Prakash Ranjan (2021-02-25 01:30:24)
>> Add a DT node for the AOSS QMP on SC7280 SoC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> index 65c1e0f2fb56..cbd567ccc04e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>> #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h>
>> #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> #include <dt-bindings/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.h>
>> +#include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-aoss-qmp.h>
>> #include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
>>
>> / {
>> @@ -368,6 +369,19 @@ pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 {
>> interrupt-controller;
>> };
>>
>> + aoss_qmp: qmp@c300000 {
>
> power-domain-controller@c300000? power-controller@c300000?
>
Its an AOSS message RAM and all other SM* SoCs have as qmp@
and the dt binding as well, I see only SM8150 with power-controller,
that should probably be fixed?
Node name should be generic while still being meaningful. Nobody knows
what qmp is, but power-controller makes sense. Can you fix this and
the
others to be power-controller?
we probably would be changing them back
to qmp or something more generic soon
since the consensus was qmp wasn't a
power-controller. So not sure if its
worth the effort here.
Ok makes sense, I will post changing others as well and see if we get
any comments there.
Thanks,
Sai
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
