Re: [PATCH v2 14/21] dt-bindings: cpufreq: qcom-hw: document support for SA8255p

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 04/09/2024 16:19, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> 
> On 9/4/2024 6:17 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 04/09/2024 14:27, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>> On 9/3/2024 11:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 03:02:33PM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>>>> Add compatible for the cpufreq engine representing support on SA8255p.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela <quic_nkela@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  .../bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml        | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml
>>>>> index 1e9797f96410..84865e553c8b 100644
>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml
>>>>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>          items:
>>>>>            - enum:
>>>>>                - qcom,qdu1000-cpufreq-epss
>>>>> +              - qcom,sa8255p-cpufreq-epss
>>>>>                - qcom,sa8775p-cpufreq-epss
>>>>>                - qcom,sc7280-cpufreq-epss
>>>>>                - qcom,sc8280xp-cpufreq-epss
>>>>> @@ -206,6 +207,21 @@ allOf:
>>>>>          interrupt-names:
>>>>>            minItems: 2
>>>>>  
>>>>> +  - if:
>>>>> +      properties:
>>>>> +        compatible:
>>>>> +          contains:
>>>>> +            enum:
>>>>> +              - qcom,sa8255p-cpufreq-epss
>>>>> +    then:
>>>>> +      properties:
>>>>> +        reg:
>>>>> +          minItems: 2
>>>>> +          maxItems: 2
>>>>> +
>>>>> +        reg-names:
>>>>> +          minItems: 2
>>>>> +          maxItems: 2
>>>> What about interrupts? You need to constrain each of such lists.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Krzysztof
>>> Interrupts are not required, I still need to put constraints for
>> It's irrelevant whether they are required or not. Each property should
>> be narrowed.
> 
> So evenif we don't use interrupts property in our DT(patch#21), we need
> to mention interrupts here? You suggest we put interrupts with maxItems: 0?

I don't understand. You use three quite separate statements. "Not
required", "don't use" and here "maxItems: 0" which means not allowed.

All of these mean something else and I keep guessing and responding
according to what you write. Probably half of my advises are just trash,
because it turns out it is something entirely else than what I read.

Make a decision how the hardware looks like.

> 
> I wonder why SA8775p compatible is not in constraint list..
> 
>>> interrupts? BTW, there is no if block for SA8775p binding in this file.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>

Best regards,
Krzysztof