[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <60487c80-c5ea-4c71-8ba3-e638ae3035a2@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 10:32:36 +0530
From: Praveen Talari <praveen.talari@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Mukesh Kumar Savaliya <mukesh.savaliya@....qualcomm.com>,
Viken Dadhaniya <viken.dadhaniya@....qualcomm.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, psodagud@...cinc.com, djaggi@...cinc.com,
quic_msavaliy@...cinc.com, quic_vtanuku@...cinc.com,
quic_arandive@...cinc.com, quic_shazhuss@...cinc.com,
Nikunj Kela <quic_nkela@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 07/12] dt-bindings: i2c: Describe SA8255p
Hi Krzysztof,
On 11/22/2025 5:10 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 10:30:13AM +0530, Praveen Talari wrote:
>> + dmas:
>> + maxItems: 2
>> +
>> + dma-names:
>> + items:
>> + - const: tx
>> + - const: rx
>> +
>> + interrupts:
>> + maxItems: 1
>> +
>> + power-domains:
>> + minItems: 2
>
> Drop
>
>> + maxItems: 2
>> +
>> + power-domain-names:
>> + items:
>> + - const: power
>> + - const: perf
>> +
>> +required:
>> + - compatible
>> + - reg
>> + - interrupts
>> + - power-domains
>> +
>> +allOf:
>
> So common SE properties are not applicable? If so explain why in the
> commit msg.
>
>> + - $ref: /schemas/i2c/i2c-controller.yaml#
>> +
>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>> +
>> +examples:
>> + - |
>> + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +
>> + i2c@...000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,sa8255p-geni-i2c";
>> + reg = <0xa90000 0x4000>;
>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 357 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> + power-domains = <&scmi0_pd 0>, <&scmi0_dvfs 0>;
>> + power-domain-names = "power", "perf";
>
> dmas and dma-names
For this platform (all Auto targets), we primarily use FIFO/CPU_DMA mode
rather than GSI mode, and these are not defined in the Device Tree file
as well now. Should we still include the dmas and dma-names properties
in the example node?
Thanks,
Praveen
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists