From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97768379EE8; Sun, 12 Apr 2026 18:45:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776019511; cv=none; b=FlqoQxRjjNjv/wJoB152oZMWSw3jDeE64KEnVZvMea25ZF0qOXSNugjtNXmUPtTIR0xxtzYnL6Vl9gdvdXDzPN+YDYqVbO6zr+sqfCj0VkIhe7ziRSpGNR+mmZKeEisDsf9G4H1gKfhn7kMxYpRDYrwhiUDBIuDhh6IA6sllThM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776019511; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JycCwi4It/RmDM1Aoh26Y5e1GASVK7xVPWR4xn0eZE8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Wr2nJP10/EuuCZuqDrSJCFsNARWmLBTtRvQZTIX6p4nSGiHW/rHnt3thepV4aC5YvedYQfg7wHW1ciEnP5uhfJzQ6qvJBmtS2V7GoQF3lRUAJUgFcXX0ox9xnJFPuyNCjh8HVr6Tgnb9iw4thI9cY8YzFYN5tl51WU0zf3ze7gc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=NuAHMdQR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="NuAHMdQR" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A480331A; Sun, 12 Apr 2026 11:45:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0AB803F641; Sun, 12 Apr 2026 11:45:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1776019508; bh=JycCwi4It/RmDM1Aoh26Y5e1GASVK7xVPWR4xn0eZE8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=NuAHMdQReW1JUpva8C4r1cbQXqIATk01UJq9WTHm/C+iuZ3Mc2tYrPl53dDN7MHsJ NyhRMK27pEDOucPgnKebroKJAcy7wKvcI2p0/2CR/D59wu0/peakhyP7jV6X0if6M1 QFeOL1S2bifnTia3nbbEASql4Nu2bNQlsdWiHQvI= Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2026 19:44:58 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Sudeep Holla , Cristian Marussi , Marek Vasut , arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] firmware: arm_scmi: Miscellaneous improvements Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, Apr 03, 2026 at 10:41:28AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi all, Hi Geert, thanks for this, first of all. I was a bit off the keyboard so the delay in my answer. I will get back at this SCMI/Clocks/Quirks matters in the next few weeks targeting next rc1-ish... In a nutshell I was thinking to proceed roughly as follows: - respinning a V3 of my original Clock Rates series WITH the addtion of your previous fixes series on top (or merged into) BUT DROPPING from my original series the patch that triggered a lot of FW panics in the wild due to out of spec FWs. (Harden Clock protocol initialization) - spinning another NEW series on top of this 'Miscellaneous improvement' series of yours, since I want to add, on top of this rework of yours, the capability for the Quirk framework to match the same quirk definition (static key) against multiple vendors/subvendors/impl....since, as you may have noticed :P, I broke a number of boards recently with just one fix kernel side BUT all of these issues can be really quirked using some common identical quirk snippet to match against all the needed vendors (rockchip/nxp/renesas as of now) ...I have some ugly working hack with which I am experimenting on this quirk matching evolution... On top of all of this I would then reapply the FW-breaking fix AND all the quirks we determine as needed (possibly N matching M vendoes) and test as much as possible pushing into for-next... Then we'll see what Sudeep thinks about all of this, of course. Thoughts ? Any feedback welcome. Thanks, Cristian