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: <59a6ef88-758f-4ec4-f663-47e4caa552c5@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 18:37:40 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.9.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] mailbox/arm64/ qcom: rework compatibles for
 fallback
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
To:     Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230314080917.68246-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
 <c35fd641-12ff-beba-341c-4d0305bcaa40@linaro.org>
 <290b9b19-a320-38a1-4426-51f5725dd54f@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <290b9b19-a320-38a1-4426-51f5725dd54f@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 16/03/2023 07:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 14/03/2023 13:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 14/03/2023 10:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Changes since v1
>>> ================
>>> 1. Rebase
>>> 2. Make msm8994 fallback for several variants, not msm8953, because the latter
>>>     actually might take some clocks.
>>
>> Although the approach looks correct, I think that in some cases it tries 
>> to mark devices compatible judging from the current driver, not from the 
>> hardware itself.
> 
> Which is what compatibility is about...
> 
>>
>> For the reference, on msm8994 the apcs is a clock controller for the l2 
>> clocks (which we do not support yet). If I'm not mistaken, on msm8976 
>> the apcs region contains a mux for the cluster1 clocks. On sdm630/660 
>> the apcs region also seems to be involved in CPU clocks scaling.
> 
> The question is this means they are incompatible?

Since there are no more comments I assume they are actually compatible
in the terms of SW interface.

Best regards,
Krzysztof