Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-07-21 10:16:14)
> On 2021-07-21 11:17, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-07-20 03:13:00)
> >
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> >> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> >> index 56ea172f641f..6d3687744440 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> >> @@ -586,7 +586,8 @@
> >>
> >> remoteproc_mpss: remoteproc@4080000 {
> >> compatible = "qcom,sc7280-mpss-pas";
> >> - reg = <0 0x04080000 0 0x10000>;
> >> + reg = <0 0x04080000 0 0x10000>, <0 0x04180000
> >> 0 0x48>;
> >> + reg-names = "qdsp6", "rmb";
> >>
> >> interrupts-extended = <&intc GIC_SPI 264
> >> IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> >> <&modem_smp2p_in 0
> >> IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> >> @@ -597,8 +598,11 @@
> >> interrupt-names = "wdog", "fatal", "ready",
> >> "handover",
> >> "stop-ack", "shutdown-ack";
> >>
> >> - clocks = <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
> >> - clock-names = "xo";
> >> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_MSS_CFG_AHB_CLK>,
> >> + <&gcc GCC_MSS_OFFLINE_AXI_CLK>,
> >> + <&gcc GCC_MSS_SNOC_AXI_CLK>,
> >> + <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
> >> + clock-names = "iface", "offline", "snoc_axi",
> >> "xo";
> >>
> >> power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_CX>,
> >> <&rpmhpd SC7280_MSS>;
> >> @@ -611,6 +615,15 @@
> >> qcom,smem-states = <&modem_smp2p_out 0>;
> >> qcom,smem-state-names = "stop";
> >>
> >> + resets = <&aoss_reset AOSS_CC_MSS_RESTART>,
> >> + <&pdc_reset PDC_MODEM_SYNC_RESET>;
> >> + reset-names = "mss_restart", "pdc_reset";
> >> +
> >> + qcom,halt-regs = <&tcsr_mutex 0x23000 0x25000
> >> 0x28000 0x33000>;
> >> + qcom,ext-regs = <&tcsr_regs 0x10000 0x10004
> >> + &tcsr_mutex 0x26004 0x26008>;
> >> + qcom,qaccept-regs = <&tcsr_mutex 0x23030
> >> 0x23040 0x23020>;
> >> +
> >> status = "disabled";
> >>
> >> glink-edge {
> >
> > Any reason to not combine this stuff with the previous patch?
>
> I split it into two separate
> patches just to show that sc7280
> supports two ways of bringing
> modem out of reset and method
> used is determined by the platform.
>
Ok. But if there are two methods do they work with the same node in
sc7280.dtsi? Because I was expecting to see the node introduced in the
SoC dtsi file in the final form instead of the half form and then be
amended in this patch.
