From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robh@kernel.org (Rob Herring) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:43:10 -0600 Subject: [PATCH V2 2/4] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add mu binding doc In-Reply-To: <1529239789-26849-3-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> References: <1529239789-26849-1-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> <1529239789-26849-3-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> Message-ID: <20180620194310.GA28983@rob-hp-laptop> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 08:49:47PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote: > The Messaging Unit module enables two processors within > the SoC to communicate and coordinate by passing messages > (e.g. data, status and control) through the MU interface. > > Cc: Shawn Guo > Cc: Sascha Hauer > Cc: Fabio Estevam > Cc: Rob Herring > Cc: Mark Rutland > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng > --- > v1->v2: > * typo fixes > * remove status property > * remove imx6&7 compatible string which may be added later for > the generic mailbox binding > > Note: Because MU used by SCU is not implemented as a mailbox driver, > Instead, they're provided in library calls to gain higher performance. Using a binding doesn't mean you have to use an OS's subsystem. What needs higher performance? What's the performance difference? Why can't the mailbox framework be improved? > Futhermore, SCU MU has only one channel. But the binding doc claims > (Change to allow 0?) > So we did not follow the mailbox binding. > > For the generic mailbox driver binding way, it may be added later. The h/w isn't changing later, so no. > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,mu.txt | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,mu.txt