| Message ID | 20220723204335.750095-3-jagan@edgeble.ai |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ARM: Add Rockchip RV1126 support | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| robh/checkpatch | success | |
| robh/patch-applied | success |
On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: > Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. > > Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> > --- > include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ Dual license and a blank line, please. > +#ifndef __DT_BINDINGS_POWER_RV1126_POWER_H__ > +#define __DT_BINDINGS_POWER_RV1126_POWER_H__ > + Best regards, Krzysztof
On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: > > Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. > > > > Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> > > Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> > > --- > > include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > > > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > Dual license and a blank line, please. Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is the issue with it? Thanks, Jagan.
On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> >>> --- >>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>> >>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >> >> Dual license and a blank line, please. > > Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is > the issue with it? The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual licensed, so they can be used in other projects. Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept such bindings. :) Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> > >>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> > >>> --- > >>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > >> > >> Dual license and a blank line, please. > > > > Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is > > the issue with it? > > The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual > licensed, so they can be used in other projects. > > Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then > it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept > such bindings. :) I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is used in BSP. Let me know what you suggest? Thanks, Jagan.
On 27/07/2022 08:52, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> >>>>> --- >>>>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ >>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >>>> >>>> Dual license and a blank line, please. >>> >>> Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is >>> the issue with it? >> >> The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual >> licensed, so they can be used in other projects. >> >> Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then >> it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept >> such bindings. :) > > I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm > wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are > merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is > used in BSP. Let me know what you suggest? Hm, I think you asked this above and I answered that dual license should be used. Maybe we misunderstand each other? Do you include in this header any work which cannot be licensed on BSD (e.g. is derivative of existing GPL-2 work)? What other (independent) includes are doing, it's not relevant really. If they were accepted as single license, then it's a past mistake. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 27/07/2022 08:52, Jagan Teki wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > >>>>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 > >>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > >>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > >>>> > >>>> Dual license and a blank line, please. > >>> > >>> Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is > >>> the issue with it? > >> > >> The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual > >> licensed, so they can be used in other projects. > >> > >> Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then > >> it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept > >> such bindings. :) > > > > I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm > > wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are > > merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is > > used in BSP. Let me know what you suggest? > > Hm, I think you asked this above and I answered that dual license should > be used. Maybe we misunderstand each other? Sorry, I'm asking again as I'm liable to change the license here or not. > > Do you include in this header any work which cannot be licensed on BSD > (e.g. is derivative of existing GPL-2 work)? Yes, it is from BSP https://github.com/rockchip-linux/kernel/blob/develop-4.19/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h Thanks, Jagan.
On 27/07/2022 09:09, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 27/07/2022 08:52, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski >>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>>>>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) >>>>>>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 >>>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ >>>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >>>>>> >>>>>> Dual license and a blank line, please. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is >>>>> the issue with it? >>>> >>>> The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual >>>> licensed, so they can be used in other projects. >>>> >>>> Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then >>>> it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept >>>> such bindings. :) >>> >>> I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm >>> wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are >>> merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is >>> used in BSP. Let me know what you suggest? >> >> Hm, I think you asked this above and I answered that dual license should >> be used. Maybe we misunderstand each other? > > Sorry, I'm asking again as I'm liable to change the license here or not. > >> >> Do you include in this header any work which cannot be licensed on BSD >> (e.g. is derivative of existing GPL-2 work)? > > Yes, it is from BSP > https://github.com/rockchip-linux/kernel/blob/develop-4.19/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h Eh... if you don't have permission to relicense it and you copied the IDs (although one would say it is not really copyrightable work), then let it be GPL-2.0. In the future just write the IDs by yourself (not as derivative work) and dual-license the header. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 27/07/2022 09:09, Jagan Teki wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 12:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> On 27/07/2022 08:52, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 at 19:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 26/07/2022 15:44, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 02:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski > >>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 23/07/2022 22:43, Jagan Teki wrote: > >>>>>>> Add power-domain header for RV1126 SoC from description in TRM. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) > >>>>>>> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>>>>> index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 > >>>>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > >>>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dual license and a blank line, please. > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, all rockchip power includes (at least here) are GPL-2.0 what is > >>>>> the issue with it? > >>>> > >>>> The headers are part of bindings and all bindings should be dual > >>>> licensed, so they can be used in other projects. > >>>> > >>>> Of course if copyright holder does not agree to release it on BSD, then > >>>> it would be fine as exception. Also would be fine from us not to accept > >>>> such bindings. :) > >>> > >>> I don't hold anything here to use dual-licensing. The only thing I'm > >>> wondering here is none of the rockchip power includes (which are > >>> merged) are using dual-licensing they simply have GPL-2.0 which is > >>> used in BSP. Let me know what you suggest? > >> > >> Hm, I think you asked this above and I answered that dual license should > >> be used. Maybe we misunderstand each other? > > > > Sorry, I'm asking again as I'm liable to change the license here or not. > > > >> > >> Do you include in this header any work which cannot be licensed on BSD > >> (e.g. is derivative of existing GPL-2 work)? > > > > Yes, it is from BSP > > https://github.com/rockchip-linux/kernel/blob/develop-4.19/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h > > Eh... if you don't have permission to relicense it and you copied the > IDs (although one would say it is not really copyrightable work), then > let it be GPL-2.0. In the future just write the IDs by yourself (not as > derivative work) and dual-license the header. Yes, I usually follow the dual-license if I wrote new ones in bindings. Thanks for the details. Jagan.
diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..f15930ff06f7 --- /dev/null +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/rv1126-power.h @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ +#ifndef __DT_BINDINGS_POWER_RV1126_POWER_H__ +#define __DT_BINDINGS_POWER_RV1126_POWER_H__ + +/* VD_CORE */ +#define RV1126_PD_CPU_0 0 +#define RV1126_PD_CPU_1 1 +#define RV1126_PD_CPU_2 2 +#define RV1126_PD_CPU_3 3 +#define RV1126_PD_CORE_ALIVE 4 + +/* VD_PMU */ +#define RV1126_PD_PMU 5 +#define RV1126_PD_PMU_ALIVE 6 + +/* VD_NPU */ +#define RV1126_PD_NPU 7 + +/* VD_VEPU */ +#define RV1126_PD_VEPU 8 + +/* VD_LOGIC */ +#define RV1126_PD_VI 9 +#define RV1126_PD_VO 10 +#define RV1126_PD_ISPP 11 +#define RV1126_PD_VDPU 12 +#define RV1126_PD_CRYPTO 13 +#define RV1126_PD_DDR 14 +#define RV1126_PD_NVM 15 +#define RV1126_PD_SDIO 16 +#define RV1126_PD_USB 17 +#define RV1126_PD_LOGIC_ALIVE 18 + +#endif