On 18/09/2025 23:01, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote: > On Thursday, 18 September 2025 02:30:09 Central European Summer Time > Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 02:22:32PM +0200, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote: >>> The Mali-based GPU on the MediaTek MT8196 SoC uses a separate MCU to >>> control the power and frequency of the GPU. >>> >>> It lets us omit the OPP tables from the device tree, as those can now be >>> enumerated at runtime from the MCU. It also means the mali GPU node >>> described in this binding does not have any clocks in this case, as all >>> clock control is delegated to the MCU. >>> >>> Add the mediatek,mt8196-mali compatible, and a performance-domains >>> property which points to the MCU's device tree node in this case. It's >>> required on mt8196 devices. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattar...@collabora.com> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml | 32 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git >>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml >>> index >>> 7ad5a3ffc5f5c753322eda9e74cc65de89d11c73..ccab2dd0ea852187e3ab75923e19739622b2b3b8 >>> 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml >>> @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@ properties: >>> - const: gpu >>> >>> clocks: >>> - minItems: 1 >> >> I don't understand why. >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> >> > > I am executing a Convex hull algorithm on the 3D space of "dt-bindings > maintainer opinions" to get a convex hull of acceptable dt-bindings > choices where two different choices are functionally equivalent. > > With this additional opinion on the krzk axis, I now know that having > the base properties accurate for the general case is not required if > the per-compatible case sets the property to false anyway. > > I hope no two opinions are collinear, as this would surely be my > undoing. > > You get to pick which axis (X, Y, Z) you are. Right-hand rule, of > course.
This piece of code is wrong and I could not deduce the reason. That's why I asked why you need that change. If you intend to waste my time, I will don't bother with this, but code is still wrong. Best regards, Krzysztof
