| Message ID | 20240104130123.37115-7-brgl@bgdev.pl (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | PCI: introduce the concept of power sequencing of PCIe devices | expand |
Hi, On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can > define the QCA PCI devices on device tree. > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > index 2dc098b39234..297d6037cd12 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > @@ -1128,6 +1128,7 @@ patternProperties: > "^purism,.*": > description: Purism, SPC > "^qca,.*": > + "^pci17cb,.*": I don't think it's a good idea to list all the PCI vendor IDs in vendor-prefixes.yaml. To please the tooling, I suggest to have a generic entry instead. Something like this (untested): "^pci[0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f],.*": description: PCI SIG Vendor ID Note, that we we already have a bunch of them: grep -ho 'pci[0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f][0-9a-f],' **/*.dts* | sort | uniq -c 70 pci0014, 3 pci10b5, 1 pci10ee, 6 pci14e4, 1 pci16c3, 2 pci17a0, 1 pci17cb, 1 pci1b4b, 63 pci8086, Greetings, -- Sebastian > description: Qualcomm Atheros, Inc. > "^qcom,.*": > description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc > -- > 2.40.1 > >
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > > > Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can > > define the QCA PCI devices on device tree. > > Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca' > should be the prefix for those. > > Rob I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain. I'm open to suggestions. Bartosz
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > > > > > > Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can > > > define the QCA PCI devices on device tree. > > > > Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca' > > should be the prefix for those. > > > > Rob > > I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their > "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable > strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain. > > I'm open to suggestions. The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate. Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with "dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good. The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare. Rob
On 09/01/2024 03:56, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> >>>> >>>> Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can >>>> define the QCA PCI devices on device tree. >>> >>> Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca' >>> should be the prefix for those. >>> >>> Rob >> >> I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their >> "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable >> strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain. >> >> I'm open to suggestions. > > The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just > dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather > than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just > greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate. > Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with > "dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not > sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good. > > The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare. Yep, the same warnings are for EEPROM and USB VID/PID compatibles, and we live with these, so I don't think PCI should be treated differently. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 10:17 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 09/01/2024 03:56, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > >>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> > >>>> > >>>> Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can > >>>> define the QCA PCI devices on device tree. > >>> > >>> Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca' > >>> should be the prefix for those. > >>> > >>> Rob > >> > >> I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their > >> "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable > >> strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain. > >> > >> I'm open to suggestions. > > > > The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just > > dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather > > than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just > > greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate. > > Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with > > "dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not > > sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good. > > > > The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare. > > Yep, the same warnings are for EEPROM and USB VID/PID compatibles, and > we live with these, so I don't think PCI should be treated differently. > Got it, I will drop this patch. Bart
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml index 2dc098b39234..297d6037cd12 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml @@ -1128,6 +1128,7 @@ patternProperties: "^purism,.*": description: Purism, SPC "^qca,.*": + "^pci17cb,.*": description: Qualcomm Atheros, Inc. "^qcom,.*": description: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc