From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
sudeep.holla@arm.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
souvik.chakravarty@arm.com, nicola.mazzucato@arm.com,
robh+dt@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Support mailboxes unidirectional channels
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 08:36:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1838b760-c911-cb0a-184e-150df2f86c3b@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZCG154hlWbLMAzIi@e120937-lin>
On 27/03/2023 17:27, Cristian Marussi wrote:
>>> + - |
>>> + firmware {
>>> + scmi {
>>> + compatible = "arm,scmi";
>>> + mboxes = <&mhu_U_tx 0 0>, <&mhu_U_rx 0 0>;
>>> + shmem = <&cpu_scp_lpri0>;
>>> +
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>
>> I don't think adding one more example with difference in only one piece
>> is needed here.
>>
>
> Mmm, I thought was sensible to add this example, given that a mailbox
> transport configuration for a mailbox exposing unidrectional channels is
> quite different from the usual bidirectional channel config already
> present in the pre-existent example.
>
> I'll add mbox-names into this example and see if I can change your
> mind...or I can then finally drop it.
And what exactly this one more example changes? Does not validate
different parts of the binding if only one property differs...
Best regards,
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-28 6:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-27 14:03 [PATCH 0/2] Add SCMI support for mailbox " Cristian Marussi
2023-03-27 14:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Support mailboxes " Cristian Marussi
2023-03-27 14:42 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-03-27 15:27 ` Cristian Marussi
2023-03-28 6:36 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
2023-03-28 7:26 ` Cristian Marussi
2023-03-27 14:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for unidirectional mailbox channels Cristian Marussi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1838b760-c911-cb0a-184e-150df2f86c3b@linaro.org \
--to=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org \
--cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicola.mazzucato@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=souvik.chakravarty@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®