[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240411174914343-0700.eberman@hu-eberman-lv.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:49:41 -0700
From: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
Marijn Suijten
<marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, "Daniel
Vetter" <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
<freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] soc: qcom: Move some socinfo defines to the header,
expand them
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 02:10:30AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 4/12/24 01:49, Elliot Berman wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:24:08PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/11/24 22:09, Elliot Berman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:05:30PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/11/24 20:55, Elliot Berman wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 10:41:29AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > > > > In preparation for parsing the chip "feature code" (FC) and "product
> > > > > > > code" (PC) (essentially the parameters that let us conclusively
> > > > > > > characterize the sillicon we're running on, including various speed
> > > > > > > bins), move the socinfo version defines to the public header and
> > > > > > > include some more FC/PC defines.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> > > > > > > ---
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 0xf is the last one.
> > >
> > > One more question, are the "internal/external feature codes" referring to
> > > internality/externality of the chips (i.e. "are they QC-lab-only engineering
> > > samples), or what else does that represent?
> >
> > Yes, QC-lab-only engineering samples is the right interpretation of
> > these feature codes.
>
> Do you think it would be beneficial to keep the logic for these ESes in
> the upstream GPU driver? Otherwise, I can yank out half of the added lines.
>
Should be fine to yank, IMO.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists