Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Mar 2021 12:35:04 +0530 | From | Sibi Sankar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 8/9] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add AOSS QMP node |
| |
On 2021-03-23 09:08, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:58:21) >> On 2021-02-27 19:26, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote: >> > On 2021-02-27 00:16, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> >> Quoting Sai Prakash Ranjan (2021-02-25 23:51:00) >> >>> On 2021-02-26 01:11, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> >>> > Quoting Sai Prakash Ranjan (2021-02-25 01:30:24) >> >>> >> Add a DT node for the AOSS QMP on SC7280 SoC. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org> >> >>> >> --- >> >>> >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 14 ++++++++++++++ >> >>> >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) >> >>> >> >> >>> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> >>> >> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> >>> >> index 65c1e0f2fb56..cbd567ccc04e 100644 >> >>> >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> >>> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> >>> >> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ >> >>> >> #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h> >> >>> >> #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h> >> >>> >> #include <dt-bindings/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.h> >> >>> >> +#include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-aoss-qmp.h> >> >>> >> #include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> / { >> >>> >> @@ -368,6 +369,19 @@ pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 { >> >>> >> interrupt-controller; >> >>> >> }; >> >>> >> >> >>> >> + aoss_qmp: qmp@c300000 { >> >>> > >> >>> > power-domain-controller@c300000? power-controller@c300000? >> >>> > >> >>> >> >>> Its an AOSS message RAM and all other SM* SoCs have as qmp@ >> >>> and the dt binding as well, I see only SM8150 with power-controller, >> >>> that should probably be fixed? >> >> >> >> Node name should be generic while still being meaningful. Nobody knows >> >> what qmp is, but power-controller makes sense. Can you fix this and >> >> the >> >> others to be power-controller? >> >> >> >> we probably would be changing them back >> to qmp or something more generic soon >> since the consensus was qmp wasn't a >> power-controller. So not sure if its >> worth the effort here. >> > > Hmm alright. Maybe mailbox? qmp is not generic. What does it stand for? > qualcomm messaging protocol?
It's documented as ^^ in the git log but I guess it should be called qualcomm mailbox protocol instead. I don't think it can be called mailbox since it doesn't have mbox cells in its bindings.
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
| |