Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-141559-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 13:09:35 -0700
From: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@quicinc.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>, Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov
	<dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>,
        Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>,
        Marijn Suijten
	<marijn.suijten@somainline.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, "Daniel
 Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski
	<krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        <freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] soc: qcom: Move some socinfo defines to the header,
 expand them
Message-ID: <20240411130802689-0700.eberman@hu-eberman-lv.qualcomm.com>
References: <20240405-topic-smem_speedbin-v1-0-ce2b864251b1@linaro.org>
 <20240405-topic-smem_speedbin-v1-1-ce2b864251b1@linaro.org>
 <20240410132510649-0700.eberman@hu-eberman-lv.qualcomm.com>
 <2c2bca6c-b429-4cef-b63a-ee3bd6c9eecb@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2c2bca6c-b429-4cef-b63a-ee3bd6c9eecb@linaro.org>

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:05:30PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4/11/24 20:55, Elliot Berman wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 10:41:29AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > In preparation for parsing the chip "feature code" (FC) and "product
> > > code" (PC) (essentially the parameters that let us conclusively
> > > characterize the sillicon we're running on, including various speed
> > > bins), move the socinfo version defines to the public header and
> > > include some more FC/PC defines.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > +	SOCINFO_FC_EXT_RESERVE,
> > > +};
> > 
> > SOCINFO_FC_EXT_RESERVE was a convenient limit since we mapped
> > SOCINFO_FC_AA -> string "AA" via an array, and we've only needed the 8
> > feature codes so far.
> > 
> > We should remove the EXT_RESERVE and test for the Y0-YF (internal
> > feature code) values instead.
> 
> OK
> 
> > 
> > > +
> > > +/* Internal feature codes */
> > > +/* Valid values: 0 <= n <= 0xf */
> > > +#define SOCINFO_FC_Yn(n)		(0xf1 + n)
> > > +#define SOCINFO_FC_INT_RESERVE		SOCINFO_FC_Yn(0x10)
> > 
> > We probably should've named this SOCINFO_FC_INT_MAX. Reserve implies
> > it's reserved for some future use, but it's really the max value it
> > could be.
> 
> So, should SOCINFO_FC_Yn(0x10) also be considered valid, or is (0xf)
> the last one?
> 

0xf is the last one.

Thanks,
Elliot

> > 
> > > +
> > > +/* Product codes */
> > > +#define SOCINFO_PC_UNKNOWN		0
> > > +/* Valid values: 0 <= n <= 8, the rest is reserved */
> > > +#define SOCINFO_PCn(n)			(n + 1)
> > > +#define SOCINFO_PC_RESERVE		(BIT(31) - 1)
> > 
> > Similar comments here as the SOCINFO_FC_EXT_*. It's more like known
> > values are [0,8], but more values could come in future chipsets.
> 
> Ok, sounds good, I'll remove the comment then
> 
> Konrad