Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: mailbox: qcom: Document qcom,tmelite-qmp

[Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@quicinc.com>]

On 12/5/2024 1:42 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 05/12/2024 09:06, Sricharan R wrote:
>> From: Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@quicinc.com>
>>
>> This binding describes the component responsible for communication
>> between the TME-L server based subsystems (Q6) and the TME-L client
>> (APPSS/BTSS/AUDIOSS), used for security services like secure image
>> authentication, enable/disable efuses, crypto services. Each client
>> in the   SoC has its own block of message RAM and IRQ for communication
>> with the TME-L SS. The protocol used to communicate in the message RAM
>> is known as Qualcomm Messaging Protocol (QMP).
> 
> This is RFC, so only limited review follows. I will review more once
> this is ready for review.
> 
Thanks. Once i get the design/approach confirmed, will post the V1.

>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>   .../bindings/mailbox/qcom,tmelite-qmp.yaml    | 70 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 70 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,tmelite-qmp.yaml
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,tmelite-qmp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,tmelite-qmp.yaml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..1f2b3e02b894
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/qcom,tmelite-qmp.yaml
>> @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>> +%YAML 1.2
>> +---
>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mailbox/qcom,tmelite-qmp.yaml#
>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>> +
>> +title: Qualcomm TMELITE IPCC channel
>> +
>> +maintainers:
>> +  - Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@quicinc.com>
>> +
>> +description:
>> +  This binding describes the component responsible for communication
> 
> 
> Describe the hardware, not the binding.
ho ok, will fix and move the hardware description here.

> 
>> +  between the TME-L server based subsystems (Q6) and the TME-L client
>> +  (APPSS/BTSS/AUDIOSS), used for security services like secure image
>> +  authentication, enable/disable efuses, crypto services. Each client
>> +  in the   SoC has its own block of message RAM and IRQ for communication
>> +  with the TME-L SS. The protocol used to communicate in the message RAM
>> +  is known as Qualcomm Messaging Protocol (QMP).
>> +
>> +properties:
>> +  compatible:
>> +    items:
>> +      - enum:
>> +          - qcom,ipq5424-tmelite-qmp
>> +      - const: qcom,tmelite-qmp
> 
> Drop generic compatible.
ok

> 
> 
>> +
>> +  reg:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +    description:
>> +      The base address and size of the message RAM for this client's
>> +      communication with the TMELITE core
> 
> Drop obvious description. Same everywhere else.
ok

> 
>> +
>> +  interrupts:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +    description:
>> +      Should specify the TMELITE message IRQ for this client
>> +
>> +  mboxes:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +    description:
>> +      Reference to the mailbox representing the outgoing doorbell in APCS for
>> +      this client, as described in mailbox/mailbox.txt
>> +
>> +  "#mbox-cells":
>> +    const: 2
>> +    description:
>> +      The first cell is the client-id, and the second cell is the signal-id.
> 
> I guess that's the only description not stating obvious.
> 
ok

>> +
>> +required:
>> +  - compatible
>> +  - reg
>> +  - interrupts
>> +  - mboxes
>> +
>> +additionalProperties: false
>> +
>> +examples:
>> +  - |
>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +
>> +    tmel_qmp: qmp@32090000 {
> 
> Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
> examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
> https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
>
ho ok, will fix

> 
>> +           compatible = "qcom,ipq5424-tmelite-qmp", "qcom,tmelite-qmp";
> 
> Use 4 spaces for example indentation.
>
ok

Regards,
  Sricharan