Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Apr 2024 09:42:31 -0500 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 03/14] dt-bindings: fsi: Document the FSI2PIB engine | From | Eddie James <> |
| |
On 4/28/24 11:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/04/2024 17:00, Eddie James wrote: >> On 4/26/24 01:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 25/04/2024 23:36, Eddie James wrote: >>>> The FSI2PIB or SCOM engine provides an interface to the POWER processor >>>> PIB (Pervasive Interconnect Bus). >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> >>>> --- >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml | 38 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml >>>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 000000000000..4d557150c2e3 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ >>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) >>>> +%YAML 1.2 >>>> +--- >>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/fsi/ibm,fsi2pib.yaml# >>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>> + >>>> +title: IBM FSI-attached SCOM engine >>>> + >>>> +maintainers: >>>> + - Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> >>>> + >>>> +description: >>>> + The SCOM engine is an interface to the POWER processor PIB (Pervasive >>>> + Interconnect Bus). This node will always be a child of an FSI CFAM node; >>>> + see fsi.txt for details on FSI slave and CFAM nodes. >>>> + >>>> +properties: >>>> + compatible: >>>> + enum: >>>> + - ibm,fsi2pib >>>> + - ibm,i2cr-scom >>> Sometimes you call these p9, sometimes p10... what is the system or SoC >>> here? Aren't you adding some generic compatibles? writing-bindings and >>> numerous guides are clear on that. >> >> Open source FSI support started with P9 chips so we initially added >> p9-sbefifo, p9-occ, etc. P10 has all of the same engines as P9 plus the >> SPI controller, so that's why SPI is p10-spi. P11 has the same engines >> as P10. For scom/fsi2pib we could call it p9-scom I suppose... This >> series isn't just documentation for a new system, I'm adding >> documentation that should have been added for P9. Anyway I'm not sure >> what you mean about generic compatibles? You mean just add a "scom" or >> "fsi2pib" compatible? writing-bindings says "DO make 'compatible' >> properties specific" > Usually it means that parts of SoC must have the name of the SoC, as > first component of the name. Your boards are a bit different here, > because I suppose no one will ever make a product except you, but still > code could follow same set of rules.
OK, this wasn't mentioned when fsi2spi binding was merged, and I thought to make fsi2pib the same. I can switch to p9-scom or something.
Thanks,
Eddie
> > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
| |