Re: [PATCH v16 1/3] dt-bindings: perf: Add Broadcom Raspberry Pi AXI PMU definition

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 08:14:14PM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> Add device tree bindings for the Broadcom Raspberry Pi AXI PMU block
> found on BCM2835, BCM2711, and BCM2712 SoCs.
> 
> Depending on the SoC and security configuration, these PMUs support
> either direct MMIO access for the System monitor or routing via the
> Raspberry Pi firmware mailbox IPC for the VideoCore VPU monitor.

In such case, where is mboxes property?

> 
> Co-developed-by: Dom Cobley <popcornmix@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Dom Cobley <popcornmix@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  .../bindings/perf/brcm,bcm2835-axiperf.yaml   | 50 +++++++++++++++++++
>  MAINTAINERS                                   |  7 +++
>  2 files changed, 57 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/brcm,bcm2835-axiperf.yaml

...

> +description: |

Do not need '|' unless you need to preserve formatting.

> +  The Broadcom BCM2835 series (including BCM2711 and BCM2712) features hardware
> +  performance monitors on the AXI bus for evaluating memory bandwidth and
> +  system traffic. Two monitor register blocks are present: the primary monitor
> +  evaluates the System fabric, while the secondary monitor evaluates the
> +  VideoCore VPU fabric. This block is distinct from the BCM5301X AXI Trace
> +  Module.
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    enum:
> +      - brcm,bcm2711-axiperf
> +      - brcm,bcm2712-axiperf
> +      - brcm,bcm2835-axiperf
> +
> +  reg:
> +    items:
> +      - description: System monitor registers
> +      - description: VPU monitor registers
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    pmu@7e009800 {
> +        compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-axiperf";
> +        reg = <0x7e009800 0x100>,
> +              <0x7ee08000 0x100>;
> +    };
> +  - |
> +    pmu@7c012800 {
> +        compatible = "brcm,bcm2712-axiperf";
> +        reg = <0x7c012800 0x100>,
> +              <0x7ee00000 0x100>;
> +    };

Drop the second example, redundant. They are the same.

Best regards,
Krzysztof