On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 05:03:31PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: 27 June 2025 22:00 > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:22:25PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote: > > > Document the PCIe controller device tree bindings for Tesla FSD > > > SoC for both RC and EP. > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/tesla,fsd-pcie-ep.yaml > > > > I'm not sure about the "tesla,fsd-pcie-ep.yaml" filename. I see that > > it currently only describes a tesla endpoint, but it seems like maybe > > this should be parallel to the "samsung,exynos-pcie.yaml" host > > controller binding. > > Actually there is no support for Exynos5433 in EP mode. Initially I > named the binding file "samsung,exynos-pcie-ep.yaml" to make it > parallel to the host controller bindings. But I received a comment > that file names should match the compatible strings which makes > sense so I changed it to this. Certainly makes sense to match the compatible strings, although samsung,exynos-pcie.yaml now includes both: samsung,exynos5433-pcie tesla,fsd-pcie Exynos5433 may not support EP mode, but I assume the underlying IP for the Tesla FSD in EP mode is still Samsung, and I assume some Exynos device may someday support EP mode. But I see Krzysztof's suggestion that the filename match compatible and also Rob's observation that there's not much shared between samsung,exynos5433-pcie and tesla,fsd-pcie. Maybe that means both the RC and EP bindings should be named "tesla,fsd..." It seems a little weird that the same hardware would be named described by either "samsung-exynos" or "tesla,fsd" just depending on a mode switch. Bjorn
