On 2018/6/13 2:21, klaus.go...@theobroma-systems.com wrote:
Hi Randy,

-----8<-------------

                pcie {
+                       pcie_clkreqn: pci-clkreqn {
+                               rockchip,pins =
+                                       <2 26 RK_FUNC_2 &pcfg_pull_none>;
+                       };
+
+                       pcie_clkreqnb: pci-clkreqnb {
+                               rockchip,pins =
+                                       <4 24 RK_FUNC_1 &pcfg_pull_none>;
+                       };
+

I’m not sure if pci-clkreqn is functional at all. If not I’m not sure if we 
should add it to the dtsi.
Shawn may know more about it.

Please refer to commit 461a00bb9d539e
("arm64: dts: rockchip: kill pcie_clkreqn and pcie_clkreqnb for rk3399")

CLKREQ# is used for PCI-PM L1.x, but it's not functional for rk3399, so
we have to support CPM(clock power management), thus I kill them last
year.


                        pcie_clkreqn_cpm: pci-clkreqn-cpm {
                                rockchip,pins =
-                                       <2 RK_PD2 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>;
+                                       <2 26 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>;
                        };

                        pcie_clkreqnb_cpm: pci-clkreqnb-cpm {
                                rockchip,pins =
-                                       <4 RK_PD0 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>;
+                                       <4 24 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_none>;
                        };
                };

--
2.14.4


Could we actually use RK_Pxx for all new pin definitions? Would increase 
readability a lot.

Thanks,
Klaus




--
Best Regards
Shawn Lin

Reply via email to