Re: [PATCH V5 07/16] dt-bindings: PCI: designware: Add binding for CDM register check

[Vidya Sagar]

On 5/13/2019 8:45 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 3:25 AM Vidya Sagar <vidyas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 4/26/2019 8:02 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:49:55AM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote:
> > > > Add support to enable CDM (Configuration Dependent Module) registers check
> > > > for any data corruption. CDM registers include standard PCIe configuration
> > > > space registers, Port Logic registers and iATU and DMA registers.
> > > > Refer Section S.4 of Synopsys DesignWare Cores PCI Express Controller Databook
> > > > Version 4.90a
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > Changes since [v4]:
> > > > * None
> > > >
> > > > Changes since [v3]:
> > > > * None
> > > >
> > > > Changes since [v2]:
> > > > * Changed flag name from 'cdm-check' to 'enable-cdm-check'
> > > > * Added info about Port Logic and DMA registers being part of CDM
> > > >
> > > > Changes since [v1]:
> > > > * This is a new patch in v2 series
> > > >
> > > >    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/designware-pcie.txt | 5 +++++
> > > >    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/designware-pcie.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/designware-pcie.txt
> > > > index 5561a1c060d0..85b872c42a9f 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/designware-pcie.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/designware-pcie.txt
> > > > @@ -34,6 +34,11 @@ Optional properties:
> > > >    - clock-names: Must include the following entries:
> > > >       - "pcie"
> > > >       - "pcie_bus"
> > > > +- enable-cdm-check: This is a boolean property and if present enables
> > >
> > > This needs a vendor prefix.
> > Why only for this? Since this whole file is for Synopsys DesignWare core based PCIe IP,
> > I thought there is specific prefix required. Am I wrong? Also, CDM checking is a feature
> > of IP and DWC based implementations can choose either to enable this feature at hardware level
> > or not. And whoever enabled it at hardware level (like Tegra194) can set this flag to
> > enable corresponding software support.
>
> TBC, I meant a Synopsys vendor prefix, not NVIDIA.
>
> Any property that's not from a common binding should have a vendor
> prefix. That hasn't always happened, so we do have lots of examples
> without.
Ok. got it. I'm going to take care of this in V7 series.

> Rob