On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 4:20 AM Vidya Sagar <vidyas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 4/26/2019 9:13 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:49:58AM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote: > >> Add support for Tegra194 PCIe controllers. These controllers are based > >> on Synopsys DesignWare core IP. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> +- nvidia,bpmp: Must contain a phandle to BPMP controller node. > >> +- nvidia,controller-id : Controller specific ID > >> + 0: C0 > >> + 1: C1 > >> + 2: C2 > >> + 3: C3 > >> + 4: C4 > >> + 5: C5 > > > > We don't normal put device indexes into DT. Why do you need this. > > Perhaps for accessing the BPMP? If so, make nvidia,bpmp a phandle+cell. > BPMP needs to know the controller number to enable it hence it needs to be > passed to BPMP. Just for accessing BPMP, I already added 'nvidia,bpmp' property. Then make nvidia,bpmp take the phandle and this number. > >> +- nvidia,disable-aspm-states: Controls advertisement of ASPM states > >> + bit-0 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L0s > >> + bit-1 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L1. This also disables > >> + advertisement of ASPM-L1.1 and ASPM-L1.2 > >> + bit-2 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L1.1 > >> + bit-3 to '1': Disables advertisement of ASPM-L1.2 > > > > Can't this cover what 'supports-clkreq' does? > Well, they are related partially. i.e. if a platform doesn't have 'supports-clkreq' set, > then, by definition, it can't advertise support for ASPM L1.1 and L1.2 states. But, ASPM-L0s > and ASPM-L1 states don't depend on 'supports-clkreq' property. > Having this property gives more granularity as to support for which particular ASPM state > shouldn't be advertised by the root port. Okay, then it should be a common property then. Rob
