On 17/01/2024 12:22, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: > > > On 17/01/24 16:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> 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. > > Ok. I will drop the checks for "max-link-speed" and move them to the driver. But > I wonder why the checks for "num-lanes" are needed in the first place when they > could be in the driver as well. Yes, that's why I commented in your next patch. Best regards, Krzysztof
