Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] dts: qcom: arm64: qcom: sdm845: use defines for VMIDs

[Dylan Van Assche]

Hi,

On Mon, 2023-04-03 at 17:47 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/04/2023 17:32, Dylan Van Assche wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > 
> > On Mon, 2023-04-03 at 11:20 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 01/04/2023 19:35, Dylan Van Assche wrote:
> > > > Use VMID defines for SLPI's FastRPC node in the Qualcomm SDM845
> > > > DTS
> > > > instead of hardcoded magic values.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dylan Van Assche <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 4 +++-
> > > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > > index 1f25a7f4e02b..dc4b553cbe2e 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> > > >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h>
> > > >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,videocc-sdm845.h>
> > > >  #include <dt-bindings/dma/qcom-gpi.h>
> > > > +#include <dt-bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.h>
> > > >  #include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
> > > >  #include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.h>
> > > >  #include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,sdm845.h>
> > > > @@ -3372,7 +3373,8 @@ fastrpc {
> > > >                                         qcom,glink-channels =
> > > > "fastrpcglink-apps-dsp";
> > > >                                         label = "sdsp";
> > > >                                         qcom,non-secure-domain;
> > > > -                                       qcom,vmids = <0x3 0xF
> > > > 0x5
> > > > 0x6>;
> > > 
> > > Didn't you just add it in previous patch? Don't add incorrect
> > > code
> > > which
> > > you immediately change.
> > > 
> > 
> > Both are similar, the code is in fact the same. I followed what
> > Konrad
> > suggested in v3 to make a patch on top:
> 
> I don't understand. Device nodes are similar, but they are different?
> If
> you add a line in patch X and change it in patch X+1, then something
> is
> wrong. Isn't this the case here or these are different device nodes?
> 

They are the same node.
In the original patch the values are hex values, but Konrad asked to
make a patch on top depending on the qcom scm header which has these
magic hex values with defines.
I can make the defines as default, no problem. Will do in v5.

Kind regards,
Dylan

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>