On 23-01-22 15:10:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19/01/2023 15:04, Abel Vesa wrote: > > Add the SM8550 platform to the binding. > > > > Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > The v3 of this patchset is: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230119112453.3393911-1-abel.vesa@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Changes since v3: > > * renamed noc_aggr to noc_aggr_4, as found in the driver > > > > Changes since v2: > > * dropped the pipe from clock-names > > * removed the pcie instance number from aggre clock-names comment > > * renamed aggre clock-names to noc_aggr > > * dropped the _pcie infix from cnoc_pcie_sf_axi > > * renamed pcie_1_link_down_reset to simply link_down > > * added enable-gpios back, since pcie1 node will use it > > > > Changes since v1: > > * Switched to single compatible for both PCIes (qcom,pcie-sm8550) > > * dropped enable-gpios property > > * dropped interconnects related properties, the power-domains > > * properties > > and resets related properties the sm8550 specific allOf:if:then > > * dropped pipe_mux, phy_pipe and ref clocks from the sm8550 specific > > allOf:if:then clock-names array and decreased the minItems and > > maxItems for clocks property accordingly > > * added "minItems: 1" to interconnects, since sm8550 pcie uses just > > * one, > > same for interconnect-names > > > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml | 44 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml > > index a5859bb3dc28..58f926666332 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml > > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ properties: > > - qcom,pcie-sm8250 > > - qcom,pcie-sm8450-pcie0 > > - qcom,pcie-sm8450-pcie1 > > + - qcom,pcie-sm8550 > > - qcom,pcie-ipq6018 > > > > reg: > > @@ -65,9 +66,11 @@ properties: > > dma-coherent: true > > > > interconnects: > > + minItems: 1 > > maxItems: 2 > > > > I don't see my concerns from v3 answered. Check the dates for v4 and your reply to v3. v4 was sent a day before you sent your v3 comments. :) > > This is a friendly reminder during the review process. > > It seems my previous comments were not fully addressed. Maybe my > feedback got lost between the quotes, maybe you just forgot to apply it. > Please go back to the previous discussion and either implement all > requested changes or keep discussing them. Will address your comments in next version. > > Thank you. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
