Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] drivers: clk: tegra: add DFLL support for Tegra 4

[Svyatoslav Ryhel]

нд, 4 трав. 2025 р. о 20:11 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> пише:
>
> On 04/05/2025 18:25, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:
> > нд, 4 трав. 2025 р. о 19:23 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> пише:
> >>
> >> On 03/05/2025 10:54, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:
> >>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause */
> >>>>> +/*
> >>>>> + * This header provides Tegra114-specific constants for binding
> >>>>> + * nvidia,tegra114-car.
> >>>>> + */
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +#ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_RESET_TEGRA114_CAR_H
> >>>>> +#define _DT_BINDINGS_RESET_TEGRA114_CAR_H
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +#define TEGRA114_RESET(x)            (5 * 32 + (x))
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Does not look like a binding, but some sort of register. Binding IDs
> >>>> start from 0 (or 1) and are incremented by 1.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Hello there!
> >>> This file add same logic for Tegra114 as Tegra124 currently
> >>> implements, check here
> >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/include/dt-bindings/reset/tegra124-car.h?h=v6.14.5
> >>>
> >>> I did not re-use Tegra124 value, though it is same, to avoid confusion
> >>> in main Tegra114 device tree.
> >>
> >> What confusion? Why would anyone be interested in comparing numbers thus
> >> getting confused by different number? These are abstract IDs.
> >>
> >
> > By using TEGRA124_RESET in Tegra114 device tree
>
> Why would you use define from other SoC... and how is it related to my
> comment in the first place?
>

You did not even bother to check link that I have provided, did you?

You cut the actual device tree compatible definition,
TEGRA114_RESET(x) is a macro used further to define device tree
compatibles.

Like this:

#define TEGRA114_RST_DFLL_DVCO         TEGRA114_RESET(0)

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof