Re: [PATCH v7 1/5] dt-bindings: interconnect: Add Qualcomm IPQ9574 support

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 03/04/2024 12:42, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote:
> Add interconnect-cells to clock provider so that it can be
> used as icc provider.
> 
> Add master/slave ids for Qualcomm IPQ9574 Network-On-Chip
> interfaces. This will be used by the gcc-ipq9574 driver
> that will for providing interconnect services using the
> icc-clk framework.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <quic_varada@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v7:
> Fix macro names to be consistent with other bindings
> v6:
> Removed Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski
> Redefine the bindings such that driver and DT can share them
> 
> v3:
> Squash Documentation/ and include/ changes into same patch
> 
> qcom,ipq9574.h
> 	Move 'first id' to clock driver
> 
> ---
>  .../bindings/clock/qcom,ipq9574-gcc.yaml      |  3 +
>  .../dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,ipq9574.h   | 87 +++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 90 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,ipq9574.h
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq9574-gcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq9574-gcc.yaml
> index 944a0ea79cd6..824781cbdf34 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq9574-gcc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq9574-gcc.yaml
> @@ -33,6 +33,9 @@ properties:
>        - description: PCIE30 PHY3 pipe clock source
>        - description: USB3 PHY pipe clock source
>  
> +  '#interconnect-cells':
> +    const: 1
> +
>  required:
>    - compatible
>    - clocks
> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,ipq9574.h b/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,ipq9574.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..0b076b0cf880
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,ipq9574.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
> +#ifndef INTERCONNECT_QCOM_IPQ9574_H
> +#define INTERCONNECT_QCOM_IPQ9574_H
> +
> +#define ICC_ANOC_PCIE0		0
> +#define ICC_SNOC_PCIE0		1
> +#define ICC_ANOC_PCIE1		2
> +#define ICC_SNOC_PCIE1		3
> +#define ICC_ANOC_PCIE2		4
> +#define ICC_SNOC_PCIE2		5
> +#define ICC_ANOC_PCIE3		6
> +#define ICC_SNOC_PCIE3		7
> +#define ICC_SNOC_USB		8
> +#define ICC_ANOC_USB_AXI	9
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_NSSCC	10
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_SNOC_0	11
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_SNOC_1	12
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_PCNOC_1	13
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_QOSGEN_REF	14
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_TIMEOUT_REF	15
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_XO_DCD	16
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_ATB		17
> +#define ICC_MEM_NOC_NSSNOC	18
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_MEMNOC	19
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_MEM_NOC_1	20
> +
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_PPE		0
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_PPE_CFG	1
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_NSS_CSR	2
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_IMEM_QSB	3
> +#define ICC_NSSNOC_IMEM_AHB	4
> +
> +#define MASTER_ANOC_PCIE0		(ICC_ANOC_PCIE0 * 2)
> +#define SLAVE_ANOC_PCIE0		((ICC_ANOC_PCIE0 * 2) + 1)

Which existing Qualcomm platform has such code?

This is the third time I am asking for consistent headers. Open
existing, recently added headers and look how it is done there. Why?
Because I am against such calculations and see no reason for them.

Best regards,
Krzysztof