Re: [PATCH 01/53] dt-bindings: interconnect: qcom,icc: Introduce fixed BCM voter indices

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 11/07/2023 14:18, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> It makes zero (or less) sense to consume BCM voters per interconnect
> provider. They are shared throughout the entire system and it's enough
> to keep a single reference to each of them.
> 
> Storing them in a shared array at fixed indices will let us improve both
> the representation of the RPMh architecture (every RSC can hold a resource
> vote on any bus, they're not limited in that regard) and save as much as
> kilobytes worth of RAM.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
> ---
>  include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,icc.h | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,icc.h b/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,icc.h
> index cd34f36daaaa..9c13ef8a044e 100644
> --- a/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,icc.h
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,icc.h
> @@ -23,4 +23,12 @@
>  #define QCOM_ICC_TAG_ALWAYS		(QCOM_ICC_TAG_AMC | QCOM_ICC_TAG_WAKE |\
>  					 QCOM_ICC_TAG_SLEEP)
>  
> +#define ICC_BCM_VOTER_APPS		0
> +#define ICC_BCM_VOTER_DISP		1
> +#define ICC_BCM_VOTER_CAM0		2
> +#define ICC_BCM_VOTER_CAM1		3
> +#define ICC_BCM_VOTER_CAM2		4
> +
> +#define ICC_BCM_VOTER_MAX		64

I proposed to skip the max. If you actually use it, you won't be able to
change it ever.


Best regards,
Krzysztof