[PATCH 1/9] dt-bindings: msm/dp: drop extra p1 region

[Abhinav Kumar]

+ kuogee

On 7/8/2022 12:27 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2022-07-07 20:46:43)
>> On 08/07/2022 04:28, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2022-07-07 14:31:56)
>>>> The p1 region was probably added by mistake, none of the DTS files
>>>> provides one (and the driver source code also doesn't use one). Drop it
>>>> now.
>>>
>>> Yes, looks like the driver doesn't use it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 687825c402f1 ("dt-bindings: msm/dp: Change reg definition")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml | 1 -
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml
>>>> index 94bc6e1b6451..d6bbe58ef9e8 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml
>>>> @@ -29,7 +29,6 @@ properties:
>>>>          - description: aux register block
>>>>          - description: link register block
>>>>          - description: p0 register block
>>>> -      - description: p1 register block
>>>
>>> The p1 registers exist on sc7180. They start where the example starts,
>>> at 0xae91400.
>>
>> Do they exist on e.g. sc7280? In other words, should we add the region
>> to the DTS? For now I'm going to mark it as optional.
>>
> 
> Yes I see the same address for P1 on sc7280. Maybe it's a typo? Abhinav,
> can you confirm?

P1 block does exist on sc7280 and yes its address is same as the address 
mentioned in sc7180. So its not a typo.

Yes, we are not programming this today but I would prefer to keep this 
as optional.

I did sync up with Kuogee on this change this morning, we will check a 
few things internally on the P1 block's usage as to which use-cases we 
need to program it for and update here.

The idea behind having this register space listed in the yaml is thats 
how the software documents have the blocks listed so dropping P1 block 
just because its unused seemed wrong to me. Optional seems more appropriate.

Thanks

Abhinav