On 4/28/24 11:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 26/04/2024 17:00, Eddie James wrote:
On 4/26/24 01:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 25/04/2024 23:36, Eddie James wrote:
The FSI2PIB or SCOM engine provides an interface to the POWER processor
PIB (Pervasive Interconnect Bus).
Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml | 38 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..4d557150c2e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: IBM FSI-attached SCOM engine
+
+maintainers:
+ - Eddie James <eajames@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+
+description:
+ The SCOM engine is an interface to the POWER processor PIB (Pervasive
+ Interconnect Bus). This node will always be a child of an FSI CFAM node;
+ see fsi.txt for details on FSI slave and CFAM nodes.
+
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ enum:
+ - ibm,fsi2pib
+ - ibm,i2cr-scom
Sometimes you call these p9, sometimes p10... what is the system or SoC
here? Aren't you adding some generic compatibles? writing-bindings and
numerous guides are clear on that.
Open source FSI support started with P9 chips so we initially added
p9-sbefifo, p9-occ, etc. P10 has all of the same engines as P9 plus the
SPI controller, so that's why SPI is p10-spi. P11 has the same engines
as P10. For scom/fsi2pib we could call it p9-scom I suppose... This
series isn't just documentation for a new system, I'm adding
documentation that should have been added for P9. Anyway I'm not sure
what you mean about generic compatibles? You mean just add a "scom" or
"fsi2pib" compatible? writing-bindings says "DO make 'compatible'
properties specific"
Usually it means that parts of SoC must have the name of the SoC, as
first component of the name. Your boards are a bit different here,
because I suppose no one will ever make a product except you, but still
code could follow same set of rules.
OK, this wasn't mentioned when fsi2spi binding was merged, and I thought
to make fsi2pib the same. I can switch to p9-scom or something.
Thanks,
Eddie
Best regards,
Krzysztof
