[PATCH V2 2/4] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add mu binding doc

[s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer)]

On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 01:43:10PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> 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 <shawnguo@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>
> > Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>
> > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > 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?

>From what I see the performance is improved by polling the interrupt
registers rather than using interrupts.
I see no reason though why this can't be implemented with the mailbox
framework as is.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |