On 06-07-2025 12:08 p.m., Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Sun, Jul 06, 2025 at 10:31:38AM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
On 05-07-2025 10:57 p.m., Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 03:19:57PM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
MSM8974 requires the CX power domain, so use the msm8996_adsp_resource
which has cx under proxy_pd_names and is otherwise equivalent.
Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <l...@lucaweiss.eu>
---
drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Hmm. You are modifying the ADSP configuration in the driver, but at the
same time you've dropped CX supply from the MSS remoteproc.
The qcom_q6v5_mss driver has this support for .fallback_proxy_supply, which
are used in case the power domain is not specified.
So no driver change is necessary in the mss driver for both old and new
devicetrees, but the adsp driver does not have this fallback, so that's why
the adsp config is updated.
Does that make it clear?
Yes. Would it make sense to implement fallback_proxy_supply for ADSP
too?
Definitely would be possible, but I don't see the point in doing the
work to implement this, to then carry around a bunch of legacy
compatibility code that (very likely) won't really be used in practice.
I don't think any platform apart from msm8974 are going to be affected
by this anyways.
Still same argument from my side, I think breaking compatibility here
for this one driver outweighs the effort/code of implementing compatibility.
Regards
Luca
Regards
Luca
