[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19705501-2391-14a4-0eac-4b2b647a9735@canonical.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 14:20:12 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
Cc: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Wei Xu <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Chanho Park <chanho61.park@...sung.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Jan Kotas <jank@...ence.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 8/8] arm64: dts: ti: use 'freq-table' in UFS node
On 21/02/2022 14:13, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 19:45-20220219, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> The 'freq-table-hz' property is deprecated by UFS bindings.
>> The uint32-array requires also element to be passed within one <> block.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
>> index 599861259a30..c3afef0321ae 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-main.dtsi
>> @@ -1257,7 +1257,9 @@ ufs@...4000 {
>> compatible = "cdns,ufshc-m31-16nm", "jedec,ufs-2.0";
>> reg = <0x0 0x4e84000 0x0 0x10000>;
>> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 17 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> - freq-table-hz = <250000000 250000000>, <19200000 19200000>, <19200000 19200000>;
>> + freq-table = <250000000 250000000
>
> <min max> is much more readable and less error prone in case of a large
> set.
Pairs are easily visible if split per line, so readability is similar.
Not much is lost.
>
>> + 19200000 19200000
>> + 19200000 19200000>;
>
> are you sure the removal of the tuple adds value?
DT schema requires it, or rather: I do not know how to express uint32
tuples in DT schema. All my tries failed.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists