[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231210-scrap-backdrop-8bae1acc07fd@spud>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 13:39:12 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Xu Yang <xu.yang_2@....com>
Cc: Frank Li <frank.li@....com>, "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
"john.g.garry@...cle.com" <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
"jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
"namhyung@...nel.org" <namhyung@...nel.org>,
"irogers@...gle.com" <irogers@...gle.com>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"mike.leach@...aro.org" <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
"leo.yan@...aro.org" <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com"
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"adrian.hunter@...el.com" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: perf: fsl-imx-ddr: Add
i.MX95 compatible
On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 04:27:16AM +0000, Xu Yang wrote:
> Hi Conor,
>
> > On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 04:53:59PM +0800, Xu Yang wrote:
> > > i.MX95 has a DDR pmu. This will add a compatible for it.
> >
> > On v1 we had a discussion because the commit message wasn't clear about
> > whether or not the device was compatible with existing ones. For some
> > reason, the v2 patch _removes_ information from the commit message
> > rather than tries to explain.
> > This [1] message of yours, that I didn't get a chance to reply to before
> > you sent this new version, seems to say that there should be an
> > imx93-ddr-pmu fallback.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Just read my previous comment in [1] and found I made a mistake.
> Now I'll try to clarify it here.
>
> Imx95 and imx93 have different AXI filter configuration. I need a
> compatible for imx95 since the driver cannot differentiate them.
>
> Then I need to consider below two options:
> 1. compatible = "fsl,imx95-ddr-pmu", "fsl,imx93-ddr-pmu"
> 2. compatible = "fsl,imx95-ddr-pmu"
>
> Both of them work correctly on imx95. When I make changes in
> driver for imx95, imx93 is not affected.
>
> For basic functions, imx95 is compatible with imx93. I select the 2rd
> form for simplicity. If the first form is optimal, I can change it in next
> version.
The first form is preferred, yes.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists