Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <478125e6-7b8f-a69d-4ffb-00344611229d@quicinc.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 20:12:20 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.6.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: add lpass lpi pin
 controller node
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
CC:     <agross@kernel.org>, <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <quic_rohkumar@quicinc.com>, <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
        <dianders@chromium.org>, <swboyd@chromium.org>,
        <judyhsiao@chromium.org>,
        Venkata Prasad Potturu <quic_potturu@quicinc.com>
References: <1649685184-8448-1-git-send-email-quic_srivasam@quicinc.com>
 <1649685184-8448-3-git-send-email-quic_srivasam@quicinc.com>
 <YlSCWC47tITuW/BZ@google.com>
 <9bacee6d-ab44-2975-c523-38164d016af5@quicinc.com>
 <be8c6dae-20b1-3ba1-db3f-119da1e4ebfe@quicinc.com>
 <YlYSe5/wm06oTJej@google.com>
From:   Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam@quicinc.com>
Organization: Qualcomm
In-Reply-To: <YlYSe5/wm06oTJej@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 4/13/2022 5:29 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
Thanks for your time and valuable suggestions Matthias!!!
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 06:41:25PM +0530, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
>> On 4/12/2022 6:18 PM, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
>>> On 4/12/2022 1:02 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>>> Thanks for your time Matthias!!!
>>>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 07:23:04PM +0530, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
>>>>> Add LPASS LPI pinctrl node required for Audio functionality on sc7280
>>>>> based platforms.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam@quicinc.com>
>>>>> Co-developed-by: Venkata Prasad Potturu <quic_potturu@quicinc.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Venkata Prasad Potturu <quic_potturu@quicinc.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi |  84
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi     | 107
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>    2 files changed, 191 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
>>>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
>>>>> index 4ba2274..ea751dc 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
>>>>> @@ -238,6 +238,90 @@
>>>>>        modem-init;
>>>>>    };
>>>>>    +&dmic01 {
>>>> Shouldn't these nodes be in the PINCTRL section at their respective
>>>> positions in alphabetical order?
>>> These are not part of tlmm pin control section. These are part of
>>> lpass_tlmm section.
>>>
>>> In your previous comment you asked to remove &lpass_tlmm. Hence brought
>>> out.
>>>
>>>> nit: since you are keeping the groups the group names are a bit
>>>> generic IMO.
>>>> e.g. it is fairly obvious that 'dmic01_clk' refers to a clock pin,
>>>> however
>>>> just 'dmic01' is a bit vague. You could consider adding the prefix
>>>> 'lpass_'
>>>> to the group names for more clarity.
>>> as dmic01 has both clk and data section, I don't think keeping clk is
>>> appropriate here.
>> As these nodes are part of SC7280, i.e. qcom specific chipset, I feel lpass_
>> is redundant.
> It helps to provide some context about the pins which might not be evident
> from their short names like 'dmic01' or 'rx_swr'. A nice side effect is that
> the pins/groups would grouped automatically together in alphabetic ordering.
>
> In terms of 'redundancy' it is similar to 'qup_' prefix for the I2C/SPI/UART
> pins.
Agree. Will change accordingly. similarly will append lpass_ torx/tx/va 
mcro device node names.
>
>> If we add lpass_ to all dmic nodes, some node names are too lengthy.
> The longest would be like 'lpass_dmic01_sleep' or 'lpass_rx_swr_sleep', which
> doesn't seem outrageous.
>
> In any case it's not super important. If it bothers someone enough later
> on they can always send a patch that changes it.
Okay.