Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 9 Feb 2016 09:44:20 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: dt: mailbox: Add TI Message Manager | From | Jassi Brar <> |
| |
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> wrote: > + > + msgmgr: msgmgr@02a00000 { > + compatible = "ti,k2g-message-manager", "ti,message-manager"; > + #mbox-cells = <1>; > + reg-names = "queue_proxy_region", "queue_state_debug_region"; > + reg = <0x02a00000 0x400000>, <0x028c3400 0x400>; > + > + msgmgr_proxy_pmmc_tx_prio0: pmmc_tx_prio0 { > + ti,queue-id = <0>; > + ti,proxy-id = <0>; > + }; > + > + msgmgr_proxy_pmmc_rx: pmmc_rx { > + ti,queue-id = <5>; > + ti,proxy-id = <2>; > + interrupt-names = "rx"; > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 324 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; > + }; > + }; > + I think we should get rid of consumer specifics from the provider node...
> +... > + pmmc { > + ... > + mbox-names = "tx", "rx"; > + mboxes = <&msgmgr &msgmgr_proxy_pmmc_tx> > + <&msgmgr &msgmgr_proxy_pmmc_rx>; > + ... > + }; > ... and have consumers like pmmc { ... mbox-names = "tx", "rx"; mboxes = <&msgmgr 0 0> <&msgmgr 5 2>; };
I leave the IRQ for you to decide how to specify - a 'dummy' or 'valid' always provided as last cell in mboxes or some other way. (I'll review other patches in detail later)
cheers.
| |