On 17/01/2024 12:15, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: > > > On 17/01/24 16:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 17/01/2024 11:58, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: >>> On 17/01/24 16:05, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 17/01/2024 11:25, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: >>>>> Extend the existing compatible based checks for validating and enforcing >>>>> the "max-link-speed" property. >>>> >>>> Based on what? Driver or hardware? Your entire change suggests you >>> >>> Hardware. The PCIe controller on AM64 SoC supports up to Gen2 link speed while >>> the PCIe controllers on other SoCs support Gen3 link speed. >>> >>>> should just drop it from the binding, because this can be deduced from >>>> compatible. >>> >>> Could you please clarify? Isn't the addition of the checks for "max-link-speed" >>> identical to the checks which were added for "num-lanes", both of which are >>> Hardware specific? >> >> Compatible defines these values, at least what it looks like from the patch. > > In this patch, I have added checks for the "max-link-speed" property in the same > section that "num-lanes" is being evaluated. I know what you did in patch. I read it. > The values for "max-link-speed" are > based on the Hardware support and this patch is validating the "max-link-speed" > property in the device-tree nodes for the devices against the Hardware supported > values which this patch is adding in the corresponding section. Kindly let me > know if I misunderstood what you meant to convey. Nothing of this is relevant. I used two entirely different wordings for this and you still don't get it, so I don't know if I have third one. Maybe this: Move it to driver match data. So three entirely different wordings for the same. I don't have fourth... Best regards, Krzysztof
