mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Alexey Klimov" <alexey.klimov@linaro.org>
To: "Vivek Aknurwar" <vivek.aknurwar@oss.qualcomm.com>,
	<sudeep.holla@arm.com>, <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <mike.tipton@oss.qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] firmware: arm_scmi: Increase MAX_OPPS to 64
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2025 13:14:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DEVEXHI9CEFA.19RL3BXTV8E38@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6af5945e-7d5c-4596-ac42-c5898b4c49b7@oss.qualcomm.com>

On Wed Dec 10, 2025 at 11:28 PM GMT, Vivek Aknurwar wrote:
> Hello Sudeep/Cristian,
>
> Just following up on this patch. If there’s anything missing or
> needs adjustment, please let me know.

Vivek, please avoid top-posting.

> On 10/14/2025 12:34 AM, Vivek Aknurwar wrote:
>> Some upcoming SoCs define more than 32 operating performance points (OPPs),
>> exceeding the current SCMI protocol limit. Increase MAX_OPPS to 64
>> (next power of 2) to support these configurations.

Didn't touch for a while. The way it is stated confuses me a bit.
Should the value defined by protocol be updated out of the blue?
Should the protocol (defined by spec) be changed first?

If protocol changes, then should the version/minor version be
updated/added?

Thanks,
Alexey


>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Aknurwar <vivek.aknurwar@oss.qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
>> index 683fd9b85c5c..2249ef7fe790 100644
>> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
>> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
>>  /* Updated only after ALL the mandatory features for that version are merged */
>>  #define SCMI_PROTOCOL_SUPPORTED_VERSION		0x40000
>>  
>> -#define MAX_OPPS		32
>> +#define MAX_OPPS		64
>>  
>>  enum scmi_performance_protocol_cmd {
>>  	PERF_DOMAIN_ATTRIBUTES = 0x3,


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-12-11 13:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-14  7:34 Vivek Aknurwar
2025-10-14  7:51 ` Konrad Dybcio
2025-12-10 23:28 ` Vivek Aknurwar
2025-12-11  9:50   ` Sudeep Holla
2025-12-11 13:14   ` Alexey Klimov [this message]
2025-12-11 13:48     ` Sudeep Holla
2025-12-11 13:54       ` Alexey Klimov
2025-12-11 14:07         ` Sudeep Holla
2025-12-11 14:25           ` Alexey Klimov
2025-12-15 22:19             ` Vivek Aknurwar
2026-01-01 17:57 ` Sudeep Holla

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=DEVEXHI9CEFA.19RL3BXTV8E38@linaro.org \
    --to=alexey.klimov@linaro.org \
    --cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mike.tipton@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=vivek.aknurwar@oss.qualcomm.com \
    /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®