From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x2264VQUa0FHs+aHH6QbJIxr4LBB0S53QbOX/Rvl9W6q76nVXf5TUJ1Xx+zaO/Fz3CPw7O2tX ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518688798; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CKPqSiCLdmctdgk/3uj16Z7X1pxbjjj1hiEJFghpCQxzHG4eke1l/9YJZn6e/JFlmw 82hHfNryCsq8rkfvih4xsbYAxl1N3Emb8ySwxX6uQgBc7jLE8c3Ydr9DG1CL90yfTbGf gUE/JrHXC3hiTCBfoxw/dUbZhf8xmx0XZYNLAjv4Zz4qwL6RS4Q4qLrk+IIo+rkfSeT5 hRdrPw1DozLWUiPKeJ1aADqBoNIsW28RHSya9OcJgDg0wgjrMK7ns2lAWO5WriQ11miR jAZDNLZRjDg1O+pDwgmha0XQOOIOjmdEJIYrNQdC3zH+vNBgL+RtBJfA2l2I8KvnL7bE RkLg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version :user-agent:date:message-id:organization:from:references:to:subject :cc:arc-authentication-results; bh=WixgscDL7Nu6UdXMosLG5+79QITbJe83UNi/LSQYJ9k=; b=M3AJNswFXlWMijiZiD/W0TcXk4KaVi518CXOndxrPh6SdUX/ziuaV+qv9ENnxu5GLK qlKhxnS+HgxYHBBO/SHLUWqA6KvkzaqwIq+kamT6MWL7kR3tJnqTL2P6M6fvZ/5jEe1y uNclkUKjF6lu/tUz+YoOv5tpD16X3VX77eY4L9XUNzL3S2AMBWBz+cyeTrpNipSpkwKP J/BTFIoVfKfKopL6Xs3S0SrumKPQhuwPeMfVzhtLPm0UMTkvfIyfJczZIjvb7P5mqjct um8Fk+sSr8AtRtvjZUOLY/GjXU87e4mjN0qgcn23qoG/RaKTyWs3AKfzSfAjrxjD1PZ8 Mbuw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sudeep.holla@arm.com designates 217.140.101.70 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sudeep.holla@arm.com Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sudeep.holla@arm.com designates 217.140.101.70 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sudeep.holla@arm.com Cc: Sudeep Holla , ALKML , LKML , DTML , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/20][RESEND] firmware: ARM System Control and Management Interface(SCMI) support To: Alexey Klimov References: <1518461124-17371-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 09:59:51 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-GMAIL-THRID: =?utf-8?q?1592221911183430118?= X-GMAIL-MSGID: =?utf-8?q?1592460625405560682?= X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 15/02/18 00:09, Alexey Klimov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:45 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> ARM System Control and Management Interface(SCMI) is more flexible and >> easily extensible than any of the existing interfaces. Many vendors were >> involved in the making of this formal specification and is now published[1]. >> >> There is a strong trend in the industry to provide micro-controllers in >> systems to abstract various power, or other system management tasks. >> These controllers usually have similar interfaces, both in terms of the >> functions that are provided by them, and in terms of how requests are >> communicated to them. >> >> This specification is to standardise and avoid (any further) >> fragmentation in the design of such interface by various vendors. >> >> This patch set is intended to get feedback on the design and structure >> of the code. This is not complete and not fully tested due to >> non-availability of firmware with full feature set at this time. > > If it's not fully tested and not complete (I read as this patch set is > not ready to be merged), then maybe it's better to mark it as RFC? > Sorry that's copy paste error, will drop that. It was valid for onlyRFC version posted long ago. >> It currently doesn't support notification, asynchronous/delayed response, >> perf/power statistics region and sensor register region to name a few. >> I have borrowed some of the ideas of message allocation/management from >> TI SCI. >> >> Changes: >> >> v4[6]->v5: >> - Rebased to v4.16-rc1 >> - Updated all the gathered Ack/Reviewed-by tags(which includes >> all the drivers using SCMI protocol) > > You still didn't comment on all questions to previous patchset. > Anything else other than the below one ? I addressed the lock issue you mentioned and asked for suggestions on the delay thing. > For example, > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg626719.html > Sorry I thought I responded but I clearly missed it. I am not so for the module parameter as I did try and never found it useful for debug images of the firmware. Any other use case you have in mind ? I think it's better to keep it simpler, I am thinking of even dropping it as a configurable variable like max_rx_timeout_ms. -- Regards, Sudeep