On 4/1/24 18:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 01/04/2024 01:06, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 3/30/24 18:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 30/03/2024 05:19, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>>> From: Wilfred Mallawa <wilfred.mallawa@xxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> Describe the `ep-gpios` property which is used to map the PERST# input >>>> signal for endpoint mode. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Wilfred Mallawa <wilfred.mallawa@xxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie-ep.yaml | 3 +++ >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie-ep.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie-ep.yaml >>>> index 6b62f6f58efe..9331d44d6963 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie-ep.yaml >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie-ep.yaml >>>> @@ -30,6 +30,9 @@ properties: >>>> maximum: 32 >>>> default: 32 >>>> >>>> + ep-gpios: >>>> + description: Input GPIO configured for the PERST# signal. >>> >>> Missing maxItems. But more important: why existing property perst-gpios, >>> which you already have there in common schema, is not correct for this case? >> >> I am confused... Where do you find perst-gpios defined for the rk3399 ? >> Under Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/, the only schema I see using >> perst-gpios property are for the qcom (Qualcomm) controllers. > > You are right, it's so far only in Qualcomm. > >> The RC bindings for the rockchip rk3399 PCIe controller >> (pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie.yaml) already define the ep-gpios property. So if > > Any reason why this cannot be named like GPIO? Is there already a user > of this in Linux kernel? Commit msg says nothing about this, so that's > why I would expect name matching the signal. The RC-mode PCIe controller node of the rk3399 DTS already defines the ep-gpios property for RC side PERST# signal handling. So we simply reused the exact same name to be consistent between RC and EP. I personnally have no preferences. If there is an effort to rename such signal with some preferred pattern, I will follow. For the EP node, there was no PERST signal handling in the driver and no property defined for it, so any name is fine. "perst-gpios" would indeed be a better name, but again, given that the RC controller node has ep-gpios, we reused that. What is your recommendation here ? > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
