On 6/27/2023 9:08 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 01:20:59PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:06:19AM +0530, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
+ items:
+ - const: dp1_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dm1_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dp2_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dm2_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dp3_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dm4_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dp4_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: dm4_hs_phy_irq
+ - const: ss1_phy_irq
+ - const: ss2_phy_irq
+ - const: pwr_event_1
+ - const: pwr_event_2
+ - const: pwr_event_3
+ - const: pwr_event_4
The naming here is inconsistent and interrupts should not have "_irq"
suffixes (even if some of the current ones do for historical reasons).
I believe these should be named
pwr_event_1
dp_hs_phy_1
dm_hs_phy_1
ss_phy_1
pwr_event_2
dp_hs_phy_2
dm_hs_phy_2
ss_phy_2
pwr_event_3
dp_hs_phy_3
dm_hs_phy_3
pwr_event_4
dp_hs_phy_4
dm_hs_phy_4
or similar and be grouped by port while using the the
qcom,sc8280xp-dwc ordering for the individual lines.
Perhaps the ordering you suggested is fine too, but I'd probably move
the pwr_event ones first to match qcom,sc8280xp-dwc then, that is:
pwr_event_1
pwr_event_2
pwr_event_3
pwr_event_4
dp_hs_phy_1
dm_hs_phy_1
dp_hs_phy_2
dm_hs_phy_2
dp_hs_phy_3
dm_hs_phy_3
dp_hs_phy_4
dm_hs_phy_4
ss_phy_1
ss_phy_2
so we have them grouped as pwr_event followed by HS and with SS last.
Side note: Please note how the above interrupt properties can also be
used to infer the number of HS and SS ports.
Johan
Can't we just cleanup all at once later ? Might not be a good idea for
some properties in the file to have _irq and for some to not have it. I
will modify the order though.
Regards,
Krishna,
