On 02/04/2024 09:55, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 4/2/24 16:38, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 4/2/24 16:33, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 02/04/2024 01:36, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>>> 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 ? >>> >>> Actually I don't know, perst and ep would work for me. If you do not >>> have code for this in the driver yet (nothing is shared between ep and >>> host), then maybe let's go with perst to match the actual name. >> >> That works for me. The other simple solution would be to move the RC node >> ep-gpios description to the common schema pci/rockchip,rk3399-pcie-common.yaml, >> maybe ? Otherwise, perst-gpios like the Qualcomm schemas would be nice too. > > Thinking more about this, I think moving the ep-gpios description to the common > schema is the right thing to do given that the driver uses common code between > RC and EP to get that property. But if that is not acceptable, I can rename it > and get that property in the controller EP mode initialization code. That will > be add a little more code in the driver. I forgot that it is actually the same hardware, so if host has "ep-gpios" already then EP mode should have the same property. Common schema is good idea. Best regards, Krzysztof
