Re: [PATCH 02/10] dt-bindings: power: Add rpm power domains for SDX75

[Rohit Agarwal]

On 7/5/2023 4:13 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 5.07.2023 10:54, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
> > On 7/4/2023 11:47 AM, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
> > > On 7/3/2023 8:29 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > On 3.07.2023 16:42, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
> > > > > Add RPM power domain bindings for the SDX75 SoC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml | 1 +
> > > > >    include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h                  | 8 ++++++++
> > > > >    2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
> > > > > index afad313..58e1be8 100644
> > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
> > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
> > > > > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ properties:
> > > > >          - qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd
> > > > >          - qcom,sdx55-rpmhpd
> > > > >          - qcom,sdx65-rpmhpd
> > > > > +      - qcom,sdx75-rpmhpd
> > > > >          - qcom,sm6115-rpmpd
> > > > >          - qcom,sm6125-rpmpd
> > > > >          - qcom,sm6350-rpmhpd
> > > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
> > > > > index 1bf8e87..8092d0d 100644
> > > > > --- a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
> > > > > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
> > > > > @@ -57,6 +57,14 @@
> > > > >    #define SDX65_CX_AO    4
> > > > >    #define SDX65_MXC    5
> > > > >    +/* SDX75 Power Domain Indexes */
> > > > > +#define SDX75_CX    0
> > > > > +#define SDX75_CX_AO    1
> > > > > +#define SDX75_MSS    2
> > > > > +#define SDX75_MX    3
> > > > > +#define SDX75_MX_AO    4
> > > > > +#define SDX75_MXC    5
> > > > Please instead introduce a set of defines without the SoC prefix
> > > > (i.e. CX, CX_AO, MX etc.). We've been putting this off for too long
> > > > and you're the first unlucky guy that submitted new RPMhPD support after
> > > > we've concluded it'd be the way to go! :D Sadly, we can't replace the
> > > > existing ones retroactively..
> > > Surely No issues. Will update it.
> > I have a doubt here. Cant we completely omit the #defines here and directly index this as 0,1,...
> > because if the intention of this #defines is to understand the name of the pd then we can get
> > it from the .name attribute in rpmhpd as well, right?
> >
> > The problems with a common set of #define would be, lets say if we define CX_AO as 1 and some platform
> > doesn't have CX_AO then wouldnt it leave a null entry in the driver entry of that platform?
> Yes.
>
> We already do this in the rpmh clock driver, as:
>
> 1. there are domains that all chips share (like CX etc.)
> 2. wasting a couple of bytes lets us massively save on convolution
Ok, got it. Looks cleaner.

Thanks,
Rohit.
> Konrad
> > Thanks,
> > Rohit.
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rohit.
> > > > Konrad
> > > > > +
> > > > >    /* SM6350 Power Domain Indexes */
> > > > >    #define SM6350_CX    0
> > > > >    #define SM6350_GFX    1