[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc07c850-c3ba-48bf-8ca2-a6ffda8440e8@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 13:33:08 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>, mani@...nel.org,
alim.akhtar@...sung.com, avri.altman@....com, bvanassche@....org,
robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
andersson@...nel.org, konradybcio@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 1/3] dt-bindings: ufs: qcom: Add reg and reg-names
On 30/07/2025 12:27, Ram Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
>
>
> On 30-Jul-25 2:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 30/07/2025 10:22, Ram Kumar Dwivedi wrote:
>>> Update the Qualcomm UFS device tree bindings to support Multi-Circular
>>> Queue (MCQ) operation. This includes increasing the maximum number of
>>> register entries from 2 to 3 and extending the accepted values for
>>> reg-names to include "mcq_sqd" and "mcq_vs".
>>>
>>> These changes are required to enable MCQ support via Device Tree for
>>> platforms such as SM8650 and SM8750.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ram Kumar Dwivedi <quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 21 ++++++++++++-------
>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
>>> index 6c6043d9809e..de263118b552 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
>>> @@ -86,12 +86,17 @@ properties:
>>>
>>> reg:
>>> minItems: 1
>>> - maxItems: 2
>>> + maxItems: 3
>>>
>>> reg-names:
>>> - items:
>>> - - const: std
>>> - - const: ice
>>> + oneOf:
>>> + - items:
>>> + - const: std
>>> + - const: ice
>>> + - items:
>>> + - const: ufs_mem
>>> + - const: mcq_sqd
>>> + - const: mcq_vs
>>
>> This is incompatible change and commit msg is inaccurate here. It says
>> "extending" but you are not extending at all.
>>
>> Recent qcom patches love to break ABI and impact users. No.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Regarding your concern about this being an incompatible change — could you please clarify what specific aspect you believe breaks compatibility?
> From my side, I’ve carefully tested the patch and verified that it does not break any existing DTs. I ran the following command to validate against the schema:
I missed that earlier list is not actually used for SM8550 and SM8650.
The syntax is a bit confusing after looking only at diff, which probably
means this binding is getting messy.
I think binding should be just split the constraints are easier to follow.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists