lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: document AL02-Cx and AL03-C2 boards based on IPQ9574 family
From

On 7/26/2023 12:51 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/07/2023 07:03, Sridharan S N wrote:
>> On 7/20/2023 3:18 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On 20.07.2023 10:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 20/07/2023 10:45, Sridharan S N wrote:
>>>>> Document the below listed (Reference Design Platform) RDP boards based on IPQ9574
>>>>> family of SoCs.
>>>>>
>>>>> AL02-C3 - rdp437
>>>>> AL02-C7 - rdp433-mht-phy
>>>>> AL02-C10 - rdp433-mht-switch
>>>>> AL02-C11 - rdp467
>>>>> AL02-C12 - rdp455
>>>>> AL02-C13 - rdp459
>>>>> AL02-C15 - rdp457
>>>>> AL02-C16 - rdp456
>>>>> AL02-C17 - rdp469
>>>>> AL02-C19 - rdp461
>>>>> AL03-C2 - rdp458
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sridharan S N <quic_sridsn@quicinc.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 20 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>>> index dd66fd872c31..d992261da691 100644
>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>>> @@ -89,10 +89,20 @@ description: |
>>>>> adp
>>>>> ap-al01-c1
>>>>> ap-al02-c2
>>>>> + ap-al02-c3
>>>>> ap-al02-c6
>>>>> ap-al02-c7
>>>>> ap-al02-c8
>>>>> ap-al02-c9
>>>>> + ap-al02-c10
>>>>> + ap-al02-c11
>>>>> + ap-al02-c12
>>>>> + ap-al02-c13
>>>>> + ap-al02-c15
>>>>> + ap-al02-c16
>>>>> + ap-al02-c17
>>>>> + ap-al02-c19
>>>> Why? I asked once, but there was no feedback from Qualcomm.
>>>>
>>>> Why do we need to do this? What's the point?
>>> Another question would be, whether these boards are just one-off test
>>> prototypes of which there exist like 5-10 units, or are they actually
>>> going to be supported and useful.
>>>
>>> If it's the former, I don't think it makes sense to keep the device
>>> trees upstream.
>>>
>>> Konrad
>> These are all not test rdps and each rdps has its own configurations.
>> IPQ9574 has four pcie instances and one QDSP processor. Not all rdps use
>> all of the interfaces and it will vary for each rdp. In next version ,
>> will post with each rdp's configuration explicitly
>
> So still no answer why do we need to list it as possible boards.
> Especially that it messes with compatible style, because c[1-9] looks
> like board version.
>
> I suggest don't add these board types and drop existing ones.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Apologize for the late reply. IPQ bootloader doesn't need these info. we
will send the patch to drop the existing ones

Thanks,

Sridharan

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-08-03 13:14    [W:0.038 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site