RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: gpu: mali-valhall-csf: Document i.MX952 support
From: Guangliu Ding
Date: Wed Apr 01 2026 - 04:55:16 EST
Hi Liviu
Thanks for your review. Please refer to my comments below:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 06:12:38PM +0800, Guangliu Ding wrote:
> > Add compatible string of Mali G310 GPU on i.MX952 board.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guangliu Ding <guangliu.ding@xxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Jiyu Yang <jiyu.yang@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml
> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml
> > index 8eccd4338a2b..6a10843a26e2 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml
> > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ properties:
> > - enum:
> > - mediatek,mt8196-mali
> > - nxp,imx95-mali # G310
> > + - nxp,imx952-mali # G310
>
> Can you explain why this is needed? Can it not be covered by the existing
> compatible?
There are functional differences in GPU module (GPUMIX) between i.MX95
and i.MX952. So they cannot be fully covered by a single existing compatible.
On i.MX952, The GPU clock is controlled by hardware GPU auto clock-gating
mechanism, while the GPU clock is managed explicitly by the driver on i.MX95.
Because of these behavioral differences, separate compatible strings
"nxp,imx95-mali" and "nxp,imx952-mali" are needed to allow the driver to handle
the two variants independently and to keep room for future divergence.
>
> Best regards,
> Liviu
>
> > - rockchip,rk3588-mali
> > - const: arm,mali-valhall-csf # Mali Valhall GPU
> model/revision is fully discoverable
> >
> >
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
>
> --
> ====================
> | I would like to |
> | fix the world, |
> | but they're not |
> | giving me the |
> \ source code! /
> ---------------
> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯