| Message ID | 20240212174822.77734-3-christophe.kerello@foss.st.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add MP25 FMC2 support | expand |
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:48:12PM +0100, Christophe Kerello wrote: > From: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> > > On STM32MP25 SOC, STM32 FMC2 memory controller is in a power domain. > Allow a single 'power-domains' entry for STM32 FMC2. This should be squashed with patch 1, since they both modify the same file and this power-domain is part of the addition of mp25 support. If the mp1 doesn't have power domains, shouldn't you constrain the property to mp25 only? Cheers, Conor. > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> > Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@foss.st.com> > --- > .../bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml > index 12e6afeceffd..84ac6f50a6fc 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml > @@ -36,6 +36,9 @@ properties: > resets: > maxItems: 1 > > + power-domains: > + maxItems: 1 > + > "#address-cells": > const: 2 > > -- > 2.25.1 >
On 2/12/24 19:33, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:48:12PM +0100, Christophe Kerello wrote: >> From: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> >> >> On STM32MP25 SOC, STM32 FMC2 memory controller is in a power domain. >> Allow a single 'power-domains' entry for STM32 FMC2. > > This should be squashed with patch 1, since they both modify the same > file and this power-domain is part of the addition of mp25 support. Hi Conor, Ok, I will squash this patch with patch 1. > > If the mp1 doesn't have power domains, shouldn't you constrain the > property to mp25 only? > As this property is optional, I do not see the need to constrain the property to MP25 only, but if you think that it should be the case, I will do it. Regards, Christophe Kerello. > Cheers, > Conor. > >> >> Signed-off-by: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@foss.st.com> >> --- >> .../bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml >> index 12e6afeceffd..84ac6f50a6fc 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml >> @@ -36,6 +36,9 @@ properties: >> resets: >> maxItems: 1 >> >> + power-domains: >> + maxItems: 1 >> + >> "#address-cells": >> const: 2 >> >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> >> >> ______________________________________________________ >> Linux MTD discussion mailing list >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
On 13/02/2024 11:57, Christophe Kerello wrote: > > > On 2/12/24 19:33, Conor Dooley wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:48:12PM +0100, Christophe Kerello wrote: >>> From: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> >>> >>> On STM32MP25 SOC, STM32 FMC2 memory controller is in a power domain. >>> Allow a single 'power-domains' entry for STM32 FMC2. >> >> This should be squashed with patch 1, since they both modify the same >> file and this power-domain is part of the addition of mp25 support. > > Hi Conor, > > Ok, I will squash this patch with patch 1. > >> >> If the mp1 doesn't have power domains, shouldn't you constrain the >> property to mp25 only? >> > > As this property is optional, I do not see the need to constrain the > property to MP25 only, but if you think that it should be the case, I > will do it. The question is: is this property valid for the old/existing variant? Best regards, Krzysztof
On 2/13/24 12:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 13/02/2024 11:57, Christophe Kerello wrote: >> >> >> On 2/12/24 19:33, Conor Dooley wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:48:12PM +0100, Christophe Kerello wrote: >>>> From: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> >>>> >>>> On STM32MP25 SOC, STM32 FMC2 memory controller is in a power domain. >>>> Allow a single 'power-domains' entry for STM32 FMC2. >>> >>> This should be squashed with patch 1, since they both modify the same >>> file and this power-domain is part of the addition of mp25 support. >> >> Hi Conor, >> >> Ok, I will squash this patch with patch 1. >> >>> >>> If the mp1 doesn't have power domains, shouldn't you constrain the >>> property to mp25 only? >>> >> >> As this property is optional, I do not see the need to constrain the >> property to MP25 only, but if you think that it should be the case, I >> will do it. > > The question is: is this property valid for the old/existing variant? > Hi Krzysztof, It is not currently valid but there is a plan to move MP1 on PSCI OS-initiated. Regards, Christophe Kerello. > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
On 13/02/2024 16:57, Christophe Kerello wrote: > > > On 2/13/24 12:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 13/02/2024 11:57, Christophe Kerello wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2/12/24 19:33, Conor Dooley wrote: >>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:48:12PM +0100, Christophe Kerello wrote: >>>>> From: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> >>>>> >>>>> On STM32MP25 SOC, STM32 FMC2 memory controller is in a power domain. >>>>> Allow a single 'power-domains' entry for STM32 FMC2. >>>> >>>> This should be squashed with patch 1, since they both modify the same >>>> file and this power-domain is part of the addition of mp25 support. >>> >>> Hi Conor, >>> >>> Ok, I will squash this patch with patch 1. >>> >>>> >>>> If the mp1 doesn't have power domains, shouldn't you constrain the >>>> property to mp25 only? >>>> >>> >>> As this property is optional, I do not see the need to constrain the >>> property to MP25 only, but if you think that it should be the case, I >>> will do it. >> >> The question is: is this property valid for the old/existing variant? >> > > Hi Krzysztof, > > It is not currently valid but there is a plan to move MP1 on PSCI > OS-initiated. OK Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml index 12e6afeceffd..84ac6f50a6fc 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/st,stm32-fmc2-ebi.yaml @@ -36,6 +36,9 @@ properties: resets: maxItems: 1 + power-domains: + maxItems: 1 + "#address-cells": const: 2