Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-24782-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 17:03:23 +0200
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
To: Jie Luo <quic_luoj@quicinc.com>
CC: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>, andersson@kernel.org,
 konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
 krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
 linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
 quic_kkumarcs@quicinc.com, quic_suruchia@quicinc.com, quic_soni@quicinc.com,
 quic_pavir@quicinc.com, quic_souravp@quicinc.com, quic_linchen@quicinc.com,
 quic_leiwei@quicinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] arm64: dts: qcom: ipq9574: Add PPE device tree node
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <6fc9e65a-709a-4923-b0b3-7c460199417a@quicinc.com>
References: <20240110112059.2498-1-quic_luoj@quicinc.com> <20240110112059.2498-2-quic_luoj@quicinc.com> <a42718a9-d0f9-47d9-9ee8-fb520ed2a7a8@linaro.org> <de0ad768-05fa-4bb1-bcbc-0adb28cb2257@quicinc.com> <CAA8EJppeQdB4W8u0ux16pxBBwF_fpt1j-5aC0f849n9_iaaYtQ@mail.gmail.com> <6fc9e65a-709a-4923-b0b3-7c460199417a@quicinc.com>
Message-ID: <1552D7D8-2D1B-4236-A5BF-02B68DC919CB@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 12 January 2024 16:40:02 EET, Jie Luo <quic_luoj@quicinc=2Ecom> wrote:
>
>
>On 1/12/2024 12:06 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 at 17:31, Jie Luo <quic_luoj@quicinc=2Ecom> wrote:
>
>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>> +                    reg =3D <0x3a000000 0xb00000>;
>>>>> +                    #address-cells =3D <1>;
>>>>> +                    #size-cells =3D <1>;
>>>>> +                    ranges;
>>>>=20
>>>> Put after reg=2E
>>> Ok=2E
>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>> +                    status =3D "okay";
>>>>=20
>>>> Drop
>>> Ok=2E
>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> All of above comments apply to your entire patchset and all places=2E
>>>>=20
>>>> Looking at code further, it does not look like suitable for mainline,
>>>> but copy of downstream code=2E That's not what we expect upstream=2E =
Please
>>>> go back to your bindings first=2E Also, I really insist you reaching =
out
>>>> to other folks to help you in this process=2E
>>>>=20
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>=20
>>> We will do internal review of the gaps and update the patches as per
>>> your comments=2E
>>>=20
>>> Thanks for the review comments=2E
>>=20
>>  From the first glance, the bindings do not follow upstream principles=
=2E
>> You have all the settings (tdm, port config, etc) in the DT, while
>> they should instead go to the driver=2E Well, unless you expect that th=
e
>> board might need to override them=2E
>>=20
>Hi Dmitry,
>The TDM configuration varies per SoC type, since the ethernet port capabi=
lities of the SoCs vary=2E So we will have two different TDM configurations=
 for IPQ5332 and IPQ9574 SoC=2E The driver also will
>need to support future SoC, so we choose to configure this from the DTSI=
=2E The same reason applies to the port scheduler config as well=2E

If it differs from SoC to SoC only, it goes to the driver=2E Point=2E No o=
ther options=2E Thank you=2E

>
>Thanks for review comments=2E