[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c81b89ff-6eb5-4a01-af84-636aa2a02a34@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 07:58:16 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Krishna Chaitanya Chundru <quic_krichai@...cinc.com>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof WilczyĆski <kw@...ux.com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
cros-qcom-dts-watchers@...omium.org, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, quic_vbadigan@...cinc.com,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] dt-bindings: PCI: Add binding for qps615
On 26/11/2024 07:50, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>
>
> On 11/25/2024 1:10 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 24/11/2024 02:41, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> + qps615,axi-clk-freq-hz:
>>>>
>>>> That's a downstream code you send us.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, why assigned clock rates do not work for you? You are
>>>> re-implementing legacy property now under different name :/
>>>>
>>>> The assigned clock rates comes in to the picture when we are
>>>> using clock
>>> framework to control the clocks. For this switch there are no
>>> clocks needs to be control, the moment we power on the switch
>>> clocks are enabled by default. This switch provides a mechanism to
>>> control the frequency using i2c. And switch supports only two
>>> frequencies i.e
>>
>>
>> frequency of what, since there are no clocks?
>>
> The axi clock frequency internal to the switch, host can't control
> the enablement of the clocks it can control only the frequency.
>
> we already had a discussion on this on v2[1], and we taught you agreed
> on this property.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/d1af1eac-f9bd-7a8e-586b-5c2a76445145@codeaurora.org/T/#m3d5864c758f2e05fa15ba522aad6a37e3417bd9f
>
This points something else. I diged v2 and found many unanswered
questions and unfinished discussion:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/linux-arm-msm/20240803-qps615-v2-0-9560b7c71369@quicinc.com/T/#m7074ab9e5f89e29faf430c82f769e67d0e4072cf
The property description did not improve, actually it got worse: you
repeat constraints in free form text.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists