[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/6] Documentation: devicetree: add bindings to support ARM MHU doorbells
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Sudeep Holla <> wrote:
> Hi Jassi,
> On 06/07/17 07:28, Jassi Brar wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Sudeep Holla <> wrote:
>>> I have posted the SCMI patches now[1],
>> I wish I was CC'ed on that. Now LKML seems too busy to forward it.
> Yes, my mistake, I should have cc-ed you.
>>> please let me know how to get
>>> both SCPI and SCMI working together with different doorbell bits on the
>>> same channel.
>> You say in the cover letter :
>> "Let me begin admitting that we are introducing yet another protocol to
>> achieve same things as many existing protocols like ARM SCPI, TI SCI,
>> QCOM RPM, Nvidia Tegra BPMP, and so on"
>> So SCMI is supposed to replace SCPI, SCI, RPM and BPMP or SCMI is
>> to be used for future platforms.
>> If SCPI and SCMI achieve the same, why have them both active simultaneously?
> Yes it may not be used, but the firmware might support both for backward
> compatibility. E.g. on Juno, we still may continue supporting SCPI while
> we transition to SCMI. So both old and new DTs must work.
Sure, but still there is no reason to have both SCMI and SCPI active
during _runtime_.
Either SCMI or SCPI should be populated by DT, not both.

>> Assuming there really is some sane excuse :-
> Yes as I mentioned above.
If you specify only one of SCPI/SCMI, you wouldn't need the shim arbitrator.

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-06 11:28    [W:0.067 / U:47.652 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site