Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Sep 2019 06:20:42 -0400 | From | Brian Masney <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: interconnect: qcom: add msm8974 bindings |
| |
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 10:01:03PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Mon 02 Sep 14:19 PDT 2019, Brian Masney wrote: > > + mmssnoc: interconnect@fc478000 { > > + reg = <0xfc478000 0x4000>; > > + compatible = "qcom,msm8974-mmssnoc"; > > + #interconnect-cells = <1>; > > + clock-names = "bus", "bus_a"; > > + clocks = <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_MMSSNOC_AHB_CLK>, > > + <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_MMSSNOC_AHB_A_CLK>; > > Isn't MMSS_S0_AXI_CLK the bus clock of the mmssnoc (which somehow seems > to depend on mmssnoc_ahb_clk)?
I'll give that a try. Do you know which clock I should use for bus_a here? On the mmcc, I see the following mmss clocks available:
MMSS_AHB_CLK_SRC MMSS_AXI_CLK_SRC MMSS_RBCPR_CLK_SRC MMSS_MISC_AHB_CLK MMSS_MMSSNOC_AHB_CLK MMSS_MMSSNOC_BTO_AHB_CLK MMSS_MMSSNOC_AXI_CLK MMSS_S0_AXI_CLK
I'm also unsure of what's going on at the hardware level that the second clock (bus_a) is needed.
> > + mdss: mdss@fd900000 { > > I think you can omit the client, as this adheres to the standard binding > for interconnect clients. And you don't need to have an example that > covers all compatibles either...
OK, I'll drop some of these.
> > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,msm8974.h b/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,msm8974.h > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..58acf7196410 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,msm8974.h > > @@ -0,0 +1,146 @@ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > Would you mind dual licensing this part as well?
Sure, that was an oversight on my part.
> Apart from that, I think this binding looks good.
Thanks,
Brian
| |