lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: arm,scmi: add smc/hvc transports
Date
Hi Sudeep,

> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: arm,scmi: add smc/hvc
> transports
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 11:58:49AM +0800, peng.fan@nxp.com wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> >
> > SCMI could use SMC/HVC as tranports. Since there is no standardized
> > id, we need to use vendor specific id. So add into devicetree binding
> > doc.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > index f493d69e6194..dacc62dc248b 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ The scmi node with the following properties shall be
> under the /firmware/ node.
> > protocol identifier for a given sub-node.
> > - #size-cells : should be '0' as 'reg' property doesn't have any size
> > associated with it.
> > +- smc-id : SMC id required when using smc or hvc transports
>
> IIUC, "arm,smc-id" is preferred more.

ok. Fix in v3.

>
> Why did you drop "arm,scmi-smc" ?

Per our discuss in v1 patchset, mailbox/smc-id could be used
to differentiate mailbox and smc transports.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/2/11/226

So I still use "arm,scmi" for smc tranports.


Thanks,
Peng.

>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-14 02:00    [W:0.088 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site