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=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 63939C04AB5 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:19:25 +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 3B1F424AB5 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="nr8UrrR6" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3B1F424AB5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.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: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=B5wqbrYm7cWl+d3yKR1y/ZmrRz4M2CZBQZrqxezxLGM=; b=nr8UrrR6X5Blub qe5OmLjd2OqMKmgw78hmvP2vniIObFUvZAuqmGFvyn+lMd6OKPIZXnvXHdOr2AGPzGppTinyB6U5S jPuMZKQAfdsWAKPuRhyyYhnBtcbx104mpV4eOxSGk8wrtcTeSptLa9R2/qTPgJWP02LMQ7EAr1sZJ invsHUX0Nr1IOraO0+P2+j19/KGdN54WqrSMj/4EzbzCWKOivQ+dGyhucbYSsPIRRVA7kaMJR4AQU +i5CNfJ9SCrzC3q/dVCQFsfxNoQ7zrIohebbiLf12o27M0Wt5AqCk99LhKm79ex0J4LB1hWg2CnZ5 MmIPbuw273KdxwCJg6Zw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hXqcC-0005sx-6b; Mon, 03 Jun 2019 17:19:20 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hXqc9-0005sI-68 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 03 Jun 2019 17:19:18 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3258480D; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 10:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from donnerap.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0D223F5AF; Mon, 3 Jun 2019 10:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:18:56 +0100 From: Andre Przywara To: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] DT: mailbox: add binding doc for the ARM SMC mailbox Message-ID: <20190603181856.34996aaa@donnerap.cambridge.arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20190603165651.GA12196@e107155-lin> References: <20190603083005.4304-1-peng.fan@nxp.com> <20190603083005.4304-2-peng.fan@nxp.com> <20190603165651.GA12196@e107155-lin> Organization: ARM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190603_101917_235344_40EFE20E X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 27.33 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, peng.fan@nxp.com, Florian Fainelli , festevam@gmail.com, jassisinghbrar@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, linux-imx@nxp.com, kernel@pengutronix.de, van.freenix@gmail.com, shawnguo@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 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 On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:56:51 +0100 Sudeep Holla wrote: Hi, > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:22:16AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > On 6/3/19 1:30 AM, peng.fan@nxp.com wrote: > > > From: Peng Fan > > > > > > The ARM SMC mailbox binding describes a firmware interface to trigger > > > actions in software layers running in the EL2 or EL3 exception levels. > > > The term "ARM" here relates to the SMC instruction as part of the ARM > > > instruction set, not as a standard endorsed by ARM Ltd. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan > > > --- > > > > > > V2: > > > Introduce interrupts as a property. > > > > > > V1: > > > arm,func-ids is still kept as an optional property, because there is no > > > defined SMC funciton id passed from SCMI. So in my test, I still use > > > arm,func-ids for ARM SIP service. > > > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 101 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..401887118c09 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm-smc.txt > > > @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ > > [...] > > > > +Optional properties: > > > +- arm,func-ids An array of 32-bit values specifying the function > > > + IDs used by each mailbox channel. Those function IDs > > > + follow the ARM SMC calling convention standard [1]. > > > + There is one identifier per channel and the number > > > + of supported channels is determined by the length > > > + of this array. > > > +- interrupts SPI interrupts may be listed for notification, > > > + each channel should use a dedicated interrupt > > > + line. > > > > I would not go about defining a specific kind of interrupt, since SPI is > > a GIC terminology, this firmware interface could be used in premise with > > any parent interrupt controller, for which the concept of a SPI/PPI/SGI > > may not be relevant. > > > > While I agree the binding document may not contain specifics, I still > don't see how to use SGI with this. Also note it's generally reserved > for OS future use(IPC) and using this for other than IPC may be bit > challenging IMO. It opens up lots of questions. Well, a PPI might be possible to use, although it's somewhat dodgy to hijack the GIC's (re-)distributor from EL3 to write to GICD_ISPENDR. Need to ask Marc about his feelings towards this. But it's definitely possible from a hypervisor to inject arbitrary interrupts into a guest. But more importantly: is there any actual reason this needs to be a GIC interrupt? If I understand the code correctly, this could just be any interrupt, including one of an interrupt combiner or a GPIO chip. So why not just use the standard wording of: "exactly one interrupt specifier for each channel"? By the way: Shouldn't new bindings use the YAML format instead? Cheers, Andre. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel