[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+WWR5r-RcuE2KGpswdRgwzOV_BZjEOzHj5bAULFD6_Xg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 10:30:09 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Linux IOMMU <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM SMMU DRIVERS"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] iommu/arm-smmu: Add support for qcom,smmu-500 variant
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 12:32 AM, Vivek Gautam
<vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> Qualcomm's arm-smmu 500 implementation supports runtime pm
> so enable the same.
That's a driver detail unrelated to the binding.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>
> Based on iommu/arm-smmu pm runtime support series [1]:
> [PATCH v8 0/5] iommu/arm-smmu: Add runtime pm/sleep support
>
> Tested on sdm845 with necessary support to enable the smmu
> and with necessary user.
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/2/325
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.txt | 14 ++++++++++++++
Please split bindings to separate patches.
> drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.txt
> index 6ea27bd4f785..0b5c6d2a9865 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.txt
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ conditions.
> "arm,mmu-500"
> "cavium,smmu-v2"
> "qcom,<soc>-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2"
I don't even see this one in the tree yet...
> + "qcom,<soc>-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500"
IIRC, the mmu-500 is SMMU v2 implementation, right? Having
qcom,smmu-500 seems kind of pointless.
Given that we're there's only 1 SoC for "qcom,<soc>-smmu-v2" and
you're already on to a new genericish compatible, just do SoC specific
compatible strings.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists