Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2 01/10] Documentation: dt-bindings: mailbox: tegra: Add binding for HSP mailbox | From | Stephen Warren <> | Date | Mon, 18 Jul 2016 17:13:17 -0600 |
| |
On 07/11/2016 10:08 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 07/11/2016 08:14 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 12:35:02PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 07/07/2016 12:13 PM, Sivaram Nair wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 05:04:22PM +0800, Joseph Lo wrote: >>>>> Add DT binding for the Hardware Synchronization Primitives (HSP). The >>>>> HSP is designed for the processors to share resources and communicate >>>>> together. It provides a set of hardware synchronization primitives for >>>>> interprocessor communication. So the interprocessor communication >>>>> (IPC) >>>>> protocols can use hardware synchronization primitive, when operating >>>>> between two processors not in an SMP relationship. >>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/mailbox/tegra186-hsp.h >>>>> b/include/dt-bindings/mailbox/tegra186-hsp.h >>> >>>>> +#define HSP_MBOX_TYPE_DB 0x0 >>>>> +#define HSP_MBOX_TYPE_SM 0x1 >>>>> +#define HSP_MBOX_TYPE_SS 0x2 >>>>> +#define HSP_MBOX_TYPE_AS 0x3 >>>>> + >>>>> +#define HSP_DB_MASTER_CCPLEX 17 >>>>> +#define HSP_DB_MASTER_BPMP 19 >>>>> + >>>>> +#define HSP_MBOX_ID(type, ID) \ >>>>> + (HSP_MBOX_TYPE_##type << 16 | ID) >>>> >>>> It will be nicer if you avoid the macro glue magic '##' for 'type'. I >>>> would also suggest to use braces around 'type' and 'ID'. >>> >>> This technique been used without issue in quite a few other places >>> without >>> issue, and has the benefit of simplifying the text wherever the macro is >>> used. What issue do you foresee? >> >> I'm not a fan of using the macros to begin with and less so anything >> more complex than a single constant value. I'd rather see 2 cells here >> with the first being the id and the 2nd being the type. >> >> An issue with token pasting is grepping for DB, SM, etc. in kernel tree >> is probably noisy. Not such a big deal here, but a major PIA when you >> have more complex sets of includes. > > Is that a NAK or simply a suggestion? Having a single cell makes DT > parsing a bit simpler, since pretty much every SW stack provides a > default "one-cell" of_xlate implementation, whereas >1 cell means custom > code for of_xlate.
I didn't see a response to this. Joseph, let's just use two cells instead. I'm rather desperately waiting for this binding to be complete so I can finalize the U-Boot code that uses it, and it sounds like changing to two cells will get an ack faster. Can you post an updated version of this series today/ASAP to get things moving? Thanks.
| |