| Message ID | 20240326140108.21307-2-johan+linaro@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | clk: qcom: gpucc-sc8280xp: fix GX external supply lookup | expand |
On 26/03/2024 15:01, Johan Hovold wrote: > The SA8540P platform is closely related to SC8280XP but differs in that > it uses an external supply for the GX power domain. > > Add a new compatible string for the SA8540P GPU clock controller so that > the OS can determine which resources to look for. > > Fixes: e60b95d2b687 ("dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Allow VDD_GFX supply to GX") I don't get why adding new device support is a fix. Commit msg did not help me to understand it. > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml > index f57aceddac6b..5b385e4976b6 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties: > compatible: > enum: > - qcom,sdm845-gpucc > + - qcom,sa8540p-gpucc This looks fine and pretty trivial, but I really do not understand why skipping our list for automated testing. <standard letter> Please use scripts/get_maintainers.pl to get a list of necessary people and lists to CC. It might happen, that command when run on an older kernel, gives you outdated entries. Therefore please be sure you base your patches on recent Linux kernel. Tools like b4 or scripts/get_maintainer.pl provide you proper list of people, so fix your workflow. Tools might also fail if you work on some ancient tree (don't, instead use mainline), work on fork of kernel (don't, instead use mainline) or you ignore some maintainers (really don't). Just use b4 and everything should be fine, although remember about `b4 prep --auto-to-cc` if you added new patches to the patchset. You missed at least devicetree list (maybe more), so this won't be tested by automated tooling. Performing review on untested code might be a waste of time. Please kindly resend and include all necessary To/Cc entries. </standard letter> Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 04:59:43PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/03/2024 15:01, Johan Hovold wrote: > > The SA8540P platform is closely related to SC8280XP but differs in that > > it uses an external supply for the GX power domain. > > > > Add a new compatible string for the SA8540P GPU clock controller so that > > the OS can determine which resources to look for. > > > > Fixes: e60b95d2b687 ("dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Allow VDD_GFX supply to GX") > > I don't get why adding new device support is a fix. Commit msg did not > help me to understand it. Yeah, perhaps I could have expanded on the problem a bit more here. Hopefully it's clear if you look at the cover letter, but the commit referred to above should have added a new compatible for SA8540P which uses the new supply so that the OS can determine when it should try to look it up and when it is required. The Fixes tag can also be dropped, I admit this is not clear-cut. > > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml > > index f57aceddac6b..5b385e4976b6 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml > > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties: > > compatible: > > enum: > > - qcom,sdm845-gpucc > > + - qcom,sa8540p-gpucc > > This looks fine and pretty trivial, but I really do not understand why > skipping our list for automated testing. > > <standard letter> ... > </standard letter> Spare me the rant. This was obviously a mistake from reusing and manually amending a git-send-email command from shell history and failing to notice that this series also should have been CCed the devicetree list. Johan
On 26/03/2024 17:40, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 04:59:43PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 26/03/2024 15:01, Johan Hovold wrote: >>> The SA8540P platform is closely related to SC8280XP but differs in that >>> it uses an external supply for the GX power domain. >>> >>> Add a new compatible string for the SA8540P GPU clock controller so that >>> the OS can determine which resources to look for. >>> >>> Fixes: e60b95d2b687 ("dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Allow VDD_GFX supply to GX") >> >> I don't get why adding new device support is a fix. Commit msg did not >> help me to understand it. > > Yeah, perhaps I could have expanded on the problem a bit more here. > > Hopefully it's clear if you look at the cover letter, but the commit > referred to above should have added a new compatible for SA8540P which > uses the new supply so that the OS can determine when it should try to > look it up and when it is required. > > The Fixes tag can also be dropped, I admit this is not clear-cut. Some sort of short explanation would be good in the commit msg, so Fixes can stay. > >>> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml >>> index f57aceddac6b..5b385e4976b6 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml >>> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties: >>> compatible: >>> enum: >>> - qcom,sdm845-gpucc >>> + - qcom,sa8540p-gpucc >> >> This looks fine and pretty trivial, but I really do not understand why >> skipping our list for automated testing. >> >> <standard letter> > ... >> </standard letter> > > Spare me the rant. This was obviously a mistake from reusing and > manually amending a git-send-email command from shell history and > failing to notice that this series also should have been CCed the > devicetree list. That's not a rant but a template. :) You know, some people don't Cc DT list on purpose, claiming "it is trivial patch and I already Cc'ed other mailing lists". I don't know what was the reason here. I forgot one more template to add: P.S. This review might include comments based on templates. My intention is not to offend or patronize but streamline my review process. Thank you for understanding. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 09:54:09AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/03/2024 17:40, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 04:59:43PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 26/03/2024 15:01, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>> The SA8540P platform is closely related to SC8280XP but differs in that > >>> it uses an external supply for the GX power domain. > >>> > >>> Add a new compatible string for the SA8540P GPU clock controller so that > >>> the OS can determine which resources to look for. > >>> > >>> Fixes: e60b95d2b687 ("dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Allow VDD_GFX supply to GX") > >> > >> I don't get why adding new device support is a fix. Commit msg did not > >> help me to understand it. > > > > Yeah, perhaps I could have expanded on the problem a bit more here. > > > > Hopefully it's clear if you look at the cover letter, but the commit > > referred to above should have added a new compatible for SA8540P which > > uses the new supply so that the OS can determine when it should try to > > look it up and when it is required. > > > > The Fixes tag can also be dropped, I admit this is not clear-cut. > > Some sort of short explanation would be good in the commit msg, so Fixes > can stay. There is an explanation in the commit message, but I agree that it could be expanded. After talking to Bjorn about this yesterday, he convinced me that simply treating the supply as optional is the right thing to do here. Apparently it is possible to us an external supply also on sc8280xp. There's more to the story, and I don't have access to the documentation, but we'll go with the simpler: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240325081957.10946-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/ for now. Johan
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml index f57aceddac6b..5b385e4976b6 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties: compatible: enum: - qcom,sdm845-gpucc + - qcom,sa8540p-gpucc - qcom,sa8775p-gpucc - qcom,sc7180-gpucc - qcom,sc7280-gpucc
The SA8540P platform is closely related to SC8280XP but differs in that it uses an external supply for the GX power domain. Add a new compatible string for the SA8540P GPU clock controller so that the OS can determine which resources to look for. Fixes: e60b95d2b687 ("dt-bindings: clock: qcom: Allow VDD_GFX supply to GX") Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)