From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F616C43603 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 05:47:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56CB820637 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 05:47:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="iJRXIx/K"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=mediatek.com header.i=@mediatek.com header.b="Wx4Tj8Sk" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 56CB820637 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=mediatek.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=gmIs3Tp87ngkAwDYW9JWxm163OFj2qsf0oVumhuidFE=; b=iJRXIx/KZpxrMt HzA7MzQ2MAfz+yDdpL3lS+mx8SdOcBy24WZyY6zZyJsOQO8U2DpIRYYS42fA/BBChGNOtfrwwUks/ eVvNAZhswVjfEgbP4dnIPL6KC//TqHOds5l29fpugbxAc7XZ5wvq25D7/S0ChQwEEMBGthjGDiMXA k3bp8PHVQRrKb6A8jqFVN6YTkEIWEd7h0EQlpkBcJvWrlVDPp023AZiWlPuorhGrPqYetuFNLh/rt fbNXutgmcNLK0gaYQSs4C1i7G2/fuIDIMRpRWNjmfa5L/eIb0ZLCwoOFFKFpSzIfwlGbyp2XDRzKQ GKNudntyYSwhBk9iDd2w==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1idpPs-0007VZ-3B; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 05:47:36 +0000 Received: from mailgw02.mediatek.com ([216.200.240.185]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1idpPo-0007V8-VY; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 05:47:34 +0000 X-UUID: e95f7419130c4ddc8fcbfbd97754565c-20191207 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mediatek.com; s=dk; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:CC:To:From:Subject:Message-ID; bh=JnqPU30kEl4+RpNJnlGsN4JNwgLzMQ4oKfpMLvPeckU=; b=Wx4Tj8SkDAmVgSADeTZy0I0iQMYfQUfD4ImYPfqwkxZId2c/djEFQMadPwSIHoHW/s5p3n92jMT4jml6TZGekZSeo5753Zminh/jgJuFvIP3GpDBYLp6/MJFwXetqWxAIejdQkEtNakgQn5z2FxgWKxVIyMmVzenZLSdYG1BLOI=; X-UUID: e95f7419130c4ddc8fcbfbd97754565c-20191207 Received: from mtkcas66.mediatek.inc [(172.29.193.44)] by mailgw02.mediatek.com (envelope-from ) (musrelay.mediatek.com ESMTP with TLS) with ESMTP id 277587663; Sat, 07 Dec 2019 21:47:27 -0800 Received: from MTKMBS02N2.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.101) by MTKMBS62N2.mediatek.inc (172.29.193.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 21:38:18 -0800 Received: from mtkcas07.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.84) by mtkmbs02n2.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 13:37:00 +0800 Received: from [172.21.77.33] (172.21.77.33) by mtkcas07.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.0.1395.4 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 8 Dec 2019 13:36:37 +0800 Message-ID: <1575783443.12066.1.camel@mtkswgap22> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] soc: mediatek: add header for SiP service interface From: Stanley Chu To: Florian Fainelli Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2019 13:37:23 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: <1575700748-28191-1-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com> <1575700748-28191-2-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-SNTS-SMTP: ABB0BF249B6939E6F146B64C56060BDB722E71EF5051679CF21468003F6AF5F42000:8 X-MTK: N X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20191207_214733_022767_4AD8782C X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 9.10 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , Leon Chen =?UTF-8?Q?=28=E9=99=B3=E6=96=87=E9=8F=98=29?= , "Andy Teng \($B{}G!9\(\(B\)" , "jejb@linux.ibm.com" , Chun-Hung Wu =?UTF-8?Q?=28=E5=B7=AB=E9=A7=BF=E5=AE=8F=29?= , Kuohong Wang =?UTF-8?Q?=28=E7=8E=8B=E5=9C=8B=E9=B4=BB=29?= , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "avri.altman@wdc.com" , "linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org" , Peter Wang =?UTF-8?Q?=28=E7=8E=8B=E4=BF=A1=E5=8F=8B=29?= , "alim.akhtar@samsung.com" , "matthias.bgg@gmail.com" , "pedrom.sousa@synopsys.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "beanhuo@micron.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Florian, On Sun, 2019-12-08 at 01:40 +0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 > > +#define MTK_SIP_SMC_AARCH_BIT 0x40000000 > > +#else > > +#define MTK_SIP_SMC_AARCH_BIT 0x00000000 > > +#endif > > Cannot you use the definitions from include/linux/arm-smccc.h and use > ARM_SMCCC_CALL_CONV_SHIFT here and associated helpers? > > > + > > +/* UFS related SMC call */ > > +#define MTK_SIP_UFS_CONTROL \ > > + (0x82000276 | MTK_SIP_SMC_AARCH_BIT) > > Does bit 31 map to the fast vs. slow call of the ARM SMCCC convention or > does it have a different meaning (should not). Likewise bit 25 would be > ARM_SMMCCC_OWNER_SIP no? > > That would leave us with only 0x276 which is a valid function number. Thanks so much for these comments. I'll try to use suitable definitions instead in next version. Stanley _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel