On 17.08.2023 16:38, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > From sdm845 onwards we need to ensure the VFE is powered on prior to > switching on the CSID. > > Alternatively we could model up the GDSCs and clocks the CSID needs > without the VFE but, there's a real question of the legitimacy of such a > use-case. > > For now drawing a line at sdm845 and switching on the associated VFEs is > a perfectly valid thing to do. > > Rather than continually extend out this clause for at least two new SoCs > with this same model - making the vfe_get/vfe_put path start to look > like spaghetti we can simply test for >= sdm845 here. > > Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- Using >= here is veeery arbitrary and depends on the next person adding a SoC in chronological, or used-tech-chronological order correctly.. Not a fan! Konrad
