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: <0497ba61-7646-91bb-291c-0b437c18434f@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2023 15:06:27 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.6.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6115: Add interconnect nodes
Content-Language: en-GB
To:     Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, agross@kernel.org,
        bhupesh.linux@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        robh+dt@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org,
        konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, a39.skl@gmail.com, andersson@kernel.org
References: <20221130104519.2266918-1-bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <20221130104519.2266918-1-bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 30/11/2022 12:45, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Add the interconnect nodes inside SM6115 dtsi.
> 
> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
> ---
> - Based on linux-next/master
> - Depends on the SM6115 dt-binding and driver patchset, which can be
>    seen here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20221130103841.2266464-1-bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org/
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 51 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
> index e4a2440ce544..dad5ab3edf0e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
> @@ -485,6 +485,57 @@ usb_1_hsphy: phy@1613000 {
>   			status = "disabled";
>   		};
>   
> +		snoc: interconnect@1880000 {
> +			compatible = "qcom,sm6115-snoc";
> +			reg = <0x01880000 0x60200>;
> +			#interconnect-cells = <1>;

Should we use 2 here as we do now for most of interconnect drivers?

> +			clock-names = "bus", "bus_a";
> +			clocks = <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_SNOC_CLK>,
> +				 <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_SNOC_A_CLK>;

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry