* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 13:27 [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent Michal Simek
@ 2026-07-09 13:48 ` Mark Brown
2026-07-09 14:14 ` Sudeep Holla
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2026-07-09 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam,
Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet,
Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Sudeep Holla, Ulf Hansson,
Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 472 bytes --]
On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> rename folder to reflect it.
> From specification perspective only ARM specific transport layers should be
> available on ARM/ARM64 architectures.
Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 13:27 [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent Michal Simek
2026-07-09 13:48 ` Mark Brown
@ 2026-07-09 14:14 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-07-09 15:15 ` Michal Simek
2026-07-09 15:04 ` Vincent Guittot
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2026-07-09 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Sudeep Holla, Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski,
Brian Masney, Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu,
Fabio Estevam, Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron,
Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij,
Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown, Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá,
Pavel Machek, Peng Fan, Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd,
Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> rename folder to reflect it.
> From specification perspective only ARM specific transport layers should be
> available on ARM/ARM64 architectures.
>
> That's why get rid of ARM prefix and description from documentation, file
> names, folder names, MODULE description, module names, Kconfig and
> comments.
> But keep origin Kconfig symbols not to break existing users.
>
> Hwmon, pinctrl, powercap, regulator, reset, clk and cpufreq scmi drivers
> already miss arm prefix that's why synchronize all of them to be without
> arm prefix.
>
Technically it sounds good. We just need to workout logistics to apply
this treewide. Preferably a script that Arm SoC team can run may be the
ideal solution IMO.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 14:14 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2026-07-09 15:15 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2026-07-09 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam,
Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet,
Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar,
Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On 7/9/26 16:14, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
>> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
>> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
>> rename folder to reflect it.
>> From specification perspective only ARM specific transport layers should be
>> available on ARM/ARM64 architectures.
>>
>> That's why get rid of ARM prefix and description from documentation, file
>> names, folder names, MODULE description, module names, Kconfig and
>> comments.
>> But keep origin Kconfig symbols not to break existing users.
>>
>> Hwmon, pinctrl, powercap, regulator, reset, clk and cpufreq scmi drivers
>> already miss arm prefix that's why synchronize all of them to be without
>> arm prefix.
>>
>
> Technically it sounds good. We just need to workout logistics to apply
> this treewide. Preferably a script that Arm SoC team can run may be the
> ideal solution IMO.
I don't think this is going to be a problem if you agree with concept.
I can split it per subsystem and send separately that subsystem maintainers will
just take it to their trees.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 13:27 [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent Michal Simek
2026-07-09 13:48 ` Mark Brown
2026-07-09 14:14 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2026-07-09 15:04 ` Vincent Guittot
2026-07-09 15:56 ` Cristian Marussi
2026-07-09 16:07 ` Guenter Roeck
4 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Guittot @ 2026-07-09 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, Souvik.Chakravarty, Alex Shi,
Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam,
Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet,
Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Sudeep Holla, Ulf Hansson,
Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Thu, 9 Jul 2026 at 15:28, Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com> wrote:
>
> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> rename folder to reflect it.
> From specification perspective only ARM specific transport layers should be
> available on ARM/ARM64 architectures.
>
> That's why get rid of ARM prefix and description from documentation, file
> names, folder names, MODULE description, module names, Kconfig and
> comments.
> But keep origin Kconfig symbols not to break existing users.
>
> Hwmon, pinctrl, powercap, regulator, reset, clk and cpufreq scmi drivers
> already miss arm prefix that's why synchronize all of them to be without
> arm prefix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> ---
>
> Likely I missed other locations but I wanted to send this RFC to have a
> discussion about it.
FWIW, make sense to me
Acked-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> ---
> Documentation/power/energy-model.rst | 2 +-
> .../translations/zh_CN/power/energy-model.rst | 2 +-
> MAINTAINERS | 6 +++---
> drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c | 2 +-
> drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c | 2 +-
> drivers/firmware/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/firmware/Makefile | 2 +-
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/Kconfig | 11 +++++------
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/Makefile | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/base.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/bus.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/clock.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/common.h | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/driver.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/msg.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/notify.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/notify.h | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/perf.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/pinctrl.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/power.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/powercap.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/protocols.h | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/quirks.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/quirks.h | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/raw_mode.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/raw_mode.h | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/reset.c | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/scmi_power_control.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/sensors.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/shmem.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/system.c | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/Kconfig | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/Makefile | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/mailbox.c | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/optee.c | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/smc.c | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/virtio.c | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/Kconfig | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/Makefile | 0
> .../{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-bbm.c | 0
> .../{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-cpu.c | 0
> .../{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-lmm.c | 0
> .../{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c | 0
> .../firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx95.rst | 0
> drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/voltage.c | 0
> drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/iio/common/scmi_sensors/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c | 2 +-
> drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_perf_domain.c | 2 +-
> drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_pm_domain.c | 2 +-
> drivers/powercap/Kconfig | 4 ++--
> drivers/powercap/Makefile | 2 +-
> .../powercap/{arm_scmi_powercap.c => scmi_powercap.c} | 2 +-
> drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c | 2 +-
> drivers/reset/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/reset/reset-scmi.c | 4 ++--
> 57 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/Kconfig (91%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/Makefile (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/base.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/bus.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/clock.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/common.h (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/driver.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/msg.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/notify.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/notify.h (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/perf.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/pinctrl.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/power.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/powercap.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/protocols.h (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/quirks.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/quirks.h (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/raw_mode.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/raw_mode.h (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/reset.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/scmi_power_control.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/sensors.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/shmem.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/system.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/Kconfig (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/Makefile (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/mailbox.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/optee.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/smc.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/transports/virtio.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/Kconfig (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/Makefile (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-bbm.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-cpu.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-lmm.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/vendors/imx/imx95.rst (100%)
> rename drivers/firmware/{arm_scmi => scmi}/voltage.c (100%)
> rename drivers/powercap/{arm_scmi_powercap.c => scmi_powercap.c} (99%)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/power/energy-model.rst b/Documentation/power/energy-model.rst
> index 0d4644d72767..ca147ea36232 100644
> --- a/Documentation/power/energy-model.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/power/energy-model.rst
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ framework, and interested clients reading the data from it::
> +----------+ | +---------+
> | | |
> +---------------+ +---------------+ +--------------+
> - | cpufreq-dt | | arm_scmi | | Other |
> + | cpufreq-dt | | scmi | | Other |
> +---------------+ +---------------+ +--------------+
> ^ ^ ^
> | | |
> diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/power/energy-model.rst b/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/power/energy-model.rst
> index 48849919d8aa..057c76a087cd 100644
> --- a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/power/energy-model.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/power/energy-model.rst
> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ Documentation/driver-api/thermal/power_allocator.rst文档中找到。
> +----------+ | +---------+
> | | |
> +---------------+ +---------------+ +--------------+
> - | cpufreq-dt | | arm_scmi | | Other |
> + | cpufreq-dt | | scmi | | Other |
> +---------------+ +---------------+ +--------------+
> ^ ^ ^
> | | |
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index f37a81950e25..a15909357b10 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -26293,12 +26293,12 @@ S: Maintained
> F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,sc[mp]i.yaml
> F: drivers/clk/clk-sc[mp]i.c
> F: drivers/cpufreq/sc[mp]i-cpufreq.c
> -F: drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/
> +F: drivers/firmware/scmi/
> F: drivers/firmware/arm_scpi.c
> F: drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c
> F: drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c
> F: drivers/pmdomain/arm/
> -F: drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c
> +F: drivers/powercap/scmi_powercap.c
> F: drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
> F: drivers/reset/reset-scmi.c
> F: include/linux/sc[mp]i_protocol.h
> @@ -26312,7 +26312,7 @@ L: imx@lists.linux.dev
> L: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
> S: Maintained
> F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/nxp,*scmi.yaml
> -F: drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/
> +F: drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/
>
> SYSTEM RESET/SHUTDOWN DRIVERS
> M: Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c
> index 7c562559ad8b..d8736feb73fd 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c
> @@ -481,5 +481,5 @@ static struct scmi_driver scmi_clocks_driver = {
> module_scmi_driver(scmi_clocks_driver);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI clock driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI clock driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> index 4edb4f7a8aa9..51cff1838aca 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/scmi-cpufreq.c
> @@ -493,5 +493,5 @@ static struct scmi_driver scmi_cpufreq_drv = {
> module_scmi_driver(scmi_cpufreq_drv);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI CPUFreq interface driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI CPUFreq interface driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/Kconfig
> index 12dc70254842..79c2477b1a7a 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/Kconfig
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
>
> menu "Firmware Drivers"
>
> -source "drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Kconfig"
> +source "drivers/firmware/scmi/Kconfig"
>
> config ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL
> tristate "ARM System Control and Power Interface (SCPI) Message Protocol"
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/Makefile
> index 4ddec2820c96..0d4c2f29069a 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/Makefile
> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_TRUSTED_FOUNDATIONS) += trusted_foundations.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_TURRIS_MOX_RWTM) += turris-mox-rwtm.o
>
> obj-y += arm_ffa/
> -obj-y += arm_scmi/
> +obj-y += scmi/
> obj-y += broadcom/
> obj-y += cirrus/
> obj-y += meson/
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/scmi/Kconfig
> similarity index 91%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Kconfig
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/Kconfig
> index e3fb36825978..167c22a788a8 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/scmi/Kconfig
> @@ -1,11 +1,10 @@
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> -menu "ARM System Control and Management Interface Protocol"
> +menu "System Control and Management Interface Protocol"
>
> config ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
> - tristate "ARM System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Message Protocol"
> - depends on ARM || ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
> + tristate "System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Message Protocol"
> help
> - ARM System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) protocol is a
> + System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) protocol is a
> set of operating system-independent software interfaces that are
> used in system management. SCMI is extensible and currently provides
> interfaces for: Discovery and self-description of the interfaces
> @@ -82,8 +81,8 @@ config ARM_SCMI_QUIRKS
> depending on the SCMI firmware advertised versions and/or machine
> compatibles.
>
> -source "drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/Kconfig"
> -source "drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/Kconfig"
> +source "drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/Kconfig"
> +source "drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/Kconfig"
>
> endif #ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/scmi/Makefile
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/Makefile
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/base.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/base.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/base.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/base.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/bus.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/bus.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/clock.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/clock.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/scmi/common.h
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/common.h
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/driver.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/driver.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/msg.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/msg.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/msg.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/msg.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/notify.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/notify.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.h b/drivers/firmware/scmi/notify.h
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.h
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/notify.h
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/perf.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/perf.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/perf.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/pinctrl.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/pinctrl.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/pinctrl.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/pinctrl.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/power.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/power.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/power.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/power.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/powercap.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/powercap.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/powercap.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h b/drivers/firmware/scmi/protocols.h
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/protocols.h
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/protocols.h
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/quirks.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/quirks.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/quirks.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/quirks.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/quirks.h b/drivers/firmware/scmi/quirks.h
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/quirks.h
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/quirks.h
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/raw_mode.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/raw_mode.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.h b/drivers/firmware/scmi/raw_mode.h
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/raw_mode.h
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/raw_mode.h
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/reset.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/reset.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/reset.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/reset.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_power_control.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/scmi_power_control.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/scmi_power_control.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/scmi_power_control.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/sensors.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/sensors.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/shmem.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/shmem.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/shmem.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/shmem.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/system.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/system.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/system.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/system.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/Kconfig
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/Kconfig
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/Kconfig
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/Makefile
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/Makefile
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/Makefile
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/mailbox.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/mailbox.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/mailbox.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/mailbox.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/optee.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/optee.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/optee.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/optee.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/smc.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/smc.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/smc.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/smc.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/virtio.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/virtio.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transports/virtio.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/transports/virtio.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/Kconfig
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/Kconfig
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/Kconfig
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/Makefile
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/Makefile
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/Makefile
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-bbm.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-bbm.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-bbm.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-bbm.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-cpu.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-cpu.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-cpu.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-cpu.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-lmm.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-lmm.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-lmm.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-lmm.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx95.rst b/drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx95.rst
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx95.rst
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/vendors/imx/imx95.rst
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c b/drivers/firmware/scmi/voltage.c
> similarity index 100%
> rename from drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> rename to drivers/firmware/scmi/voltage.c
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> index 28cf6d2e83c2..1319c466ee87 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig
> @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ config GPIO_BY_PINCTRL
> create a simple GPIO device based on the pin control interface
> without doing anything custom.
>
> - This driver is used to access GPIOs over the ARM SCMI protocol.
> + This driver is used to access GPIOs over the SCMI protocol.
>
> config GPIO_CADENCE
> tristate "Cadence GPIO support"
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
> index 2bfbcc033d59..cda0aedb36ca 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
> @@ -401,7 +401,7 @@ config SENSORS_ARCTIC_FAN_CONTROLLER
> will be called arctic_fan_controller.
>
> config SENSORS_ARM_SCMI
> - tristate "ARM SCMI Sensors"
> + tristate "SCMI Sensors"
> depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
> depends on THERMAL || !THERMAL_OF
> help
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/common/scmi_sensors/Kconfig b/drivers/iio/common/scmi_sensors/Kconfig
> index 67e084cbb1ab..5c152d9d30d2 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/common/scmi_sensors/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/iio/common/scmi_sensors/Kconfig
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ config IIO_SCMI
> select IIO_KFIFO_BUF
> help
> Say yes here to build support for IIO SCMI Driver.
> - This provides ARM SCMI Protocol based IIO device.
> + This provides SCMI Protocol based IIO device.
> This driver provides support for accelerometer and gyroscope
> sensors available on SCMI based platforms.
> endmenu
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c
> index 1bb36ca477b7..e6fb0699c0a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-scmi.c
> @@ -595,5 +595,5 @@ module_scmi_driver(scmi_pinctrl_driver);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Oleksii Moisieiev <oleksii_moisieiev@epam.com>");
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI pin controller driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI pin controller driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> diff --git a/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_perf_domain.c b/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_perf_domain.c
> index 3693423459c9..00bae4e04aaa 100644
> --- a/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_perf_domain.c
> +++ b/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_perf_domain.c
> @@ -184,5 +184,5 @@ static struct scmi_driver scmi_perf_domain_driver = {
> module_scmi_driver(scmi_perf_domain_driver);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI perf domain driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI perf domain driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> diff --git a/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_pm_domain.c b/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_pm_domain.c
> index 3d73aef21d2f..64ac7566d943 100644
> --- a/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_pm_domain.c
> +++ b/drivers/pmdomain/arm/scmi_pm_domain.c
> @@ -168,5 +168,5 @@ static struct scmi_driver scmi_power_domain_driver = {
> module_scmi_driver(scmi_power_domain_driver);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI power domain driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI power domain driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> index 03c4c796d993..d3eda4a70978 100644
> --- a/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Kconfig
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ config IDLE_INJECT
> on a per CPU basis.
>
> config ARM_SCMI_POWERCAP
> - tristate "ARM SCMI Powercap driver"
> + tristate "SCMI Powercap driver"
> depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
> help
> This enables support for the ARM Powercap based on ARM SCMI
> @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ config ARM_SCMI_POWERCAP
> and monitored against the SCMI Powercap domains advertised as
> available by the SCMI platform firmware.
>
> - When compiled as module it will be called arm_scmi_powercap.ko.
> + When compiled as module it will be called scmi_powercap.ko.
>
> config DTPM
> bool "Power capping for Dynamic Thermal Power Management (EXPERIMENTAL)"
> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/Makefile b/drivers/powercap/Makefile
> index 5ab0dce565b9..b0d5d1e91d7e 100644
> --- a/drivers/powercap/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/powercap/Makefile
> @@ -7,4 +7,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_RAPL_CORE) += intel_rapl_common.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_RAPL) += intel_rapl_msr.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_RAPL_TPMI) += intel_rapl_tpmi.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_IDLE_INJECT) += idle_inject.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_POWERCAP) += arm_scmi_powercap.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_POWERCAP) += scmi_powercap.o
> diff --git a/drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c b/drivers/powercap/scmi_powercap.c
> similarity index 99%
> rename from drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c
> rename to drivers/powercap/scmi_powercap.c
> index ab66e9a3b1e2..24eef8045e80 100644
> --- a/drivers/powercap/arm_scmi_powercap.c
> +++ b/drivers/powercap/scmi_powercap.c
> @@ -546,5 +546,5 @@ static void __exit scmi_powercap_exit(void)
> module_exit(scmi_powercap_exit);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI Powercap driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI Powercap driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
> index c005e65ba0ec..ffceaa66e257 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/scmi-regulator.c
> @@ -417,5 +417,5 @@ static struct scmi_driver scmi_drv = {
> module_scmi_driver(scmi_drv);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI regulator driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI regulator driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> diff --git a/drivers/reset/Kconfig b/drivers/reset/Kconfig
> index d009eb0849a3..f09d2107d158 100644
> --- a/drivers/reset/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/reset/Kconfig
> @@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ config RESET_RZV2H_USB2PHY
> (and similar SoCs).
>
> config RESET_SCMI
> - tristate "Reset driver controlled via ARM SCMI interface"
> + tristate "Reset driver controlled via SCMI interface"
> depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL || COMPILE_TEST
> default ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
> help
> diff --git a/drivers/reset/reset-scmi.c b/drivers/reset/reset-scmi.c
> index 4335811e0cfa..a4f95a7fff87 100644
> --- a/drivers/reset/reset-scmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/reset/reset-scmi.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> /*
> - * ARM System Control and Management Interface (ARM SCMI) reset driver
> + * System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) reset driver
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2019-2021 ARM Ltd.
> */
> @@ -128,5 +128,5 @@ static struct scmi_driver scmi_reset_driver = {
> module_scmi_driver(scmi_reset_driver);
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("ARM SCMI reset controller driver");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("SCMI reset controller driver");
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> ---
> base-commit: 0e35b9b6ec0ffcc5e23cbdec09f5c622ad532b53
> branch: xnext/scmi
>
> --
> 2.43.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 13:27 [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent Michal Simek
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2026-07-09 15:04 ` Vincent Guittot
@ 2026-07-09 15:56 ` Cristian Marussi
2026-07-10 7:03 ` Michal Simek
2026-07-09 16:07 ` Guenter Roeck
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Cristian Marussi @ 2026-07-09 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam,
Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet,
Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Sudeep Holla, Ulf Hansson,
Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> rename folder to reflect it.
While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
Thanks,
Cristian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 15:56 ` Cristian Marussi
@ 2026-07-10 7:03 ` Michal Simek
2026-07-10 7:35 ` Sudeep Holla
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2026-07-10 7:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cristian Marussi
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam, Frank Li,
Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown,
Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Sudeep Holla, Ulf Hansson,
Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On 7/9/26 17:56, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
>> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
>> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
>> rename folder to reflect it.
>
> While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
> that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
> not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
> cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
> see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
> archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
I have been in CC on U-Boot RPMI patches which got to my attention because
I don't want to have another interface for MB-V(riscv-) running in programmable
logic and have another server in the system doing the same thing.
Based on that we had discussed about it with Vincent and Souvik (we missed you
there) about using SCMI on non ARM platform and both of them didn't see the
concern to be marked as ARM only protocol.
Truth is that some of protocols have ARM in description, file names, etc but
some of them not. That's why I think it is good time to sync it up and enable
running this protocol on other SOCs.
> ... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
> a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
I don't think it is going to be a big problem because it is just git mv which
git is able to gracefully handle.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-10 7:03 ` Michal Simek
@ 2026-07-10 7:35 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-07-10 7:42 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2026-07-10 7:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: Cristian Marussi, Sudeep Holla, linux-kernel, monstr, git,
vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty, Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko,
Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu,
Fabio Estevam, Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron,
Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij,
Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown, Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá,
Pavel Machek, Peng Fan, Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd,
Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:03:32AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 7/9/26 17:56, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> > > SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> > > ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> > > rename folder to reflect it.
> >
> > While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
> > that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
> > not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
> > cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
> > see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
> > archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
>
> I have been in CC on U-Boot RPMI patches which got to my attention because
> I don't want to have another interface for MB-V(riscv-) running in
> programmable logic and have another server in the system doing the same
> thing.
>
Ah that's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. I still agree with the move
in principle, but how does that align with these:
drivers/clk/clk-rpmi.c
drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-rpmi-sysmsi.c
include/linux/mailbox/riscv-rpmi-message.h
drivers/mailbox/riscv-sbi-mpxy-mbox.c(Should be fine as it is just transport)
Now I feel we need some alignment before making $subject move.
> Based on that we had discussed about it with Vincent and Souvik (we missed
> you there) about using SCMI on non ARM platform and both of them didn't see
> the concern to be marked as ARM only protocol.
> Truth is that some of protocols have ARM in description, file names, etc but
> some of them not. That's why I think it is good time to sync it up and
> enable
> running this protocol on other SOCs.
>
> > ... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
> > a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
> I don't think it is going to be a big problem because it is just git mv
> which git is able to gracefully handle.
>
Otherwise it may end up being unnecessary churn though I completely agree
with the git/backporting aspects. Just don't want to churn things up until
we have some plan and further changes/users of this move.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-10 7:35 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2026-07-10 7:42 ` Michal Simek
2026-07-10 8:38 ` Sudeep Holla
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2026-07-10 7:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla
Cc: Cristian Marussi, linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot,
Souvik.Chakravarty, Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko,
Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu,
Fabio Estevam, Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron,
Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij,
Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown, Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá,
Pavel Machek, Peng Fan, Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd,
Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On 7/10/26 09:35, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:03:32AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/9/26 17:56, Cristian Marussi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
>>>> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
>>>> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
>>>> rename folder to reflect it.
>>>
>>> While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
>>> that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
>>> not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
>>> cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
>>> see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
>>> archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
>>
>> I have been in CC on U-Boot RPMI patches which got to my attention because
>> I don't want to have another interface for MB-V(riscv-) running in
>> programmable logic and have another server in the system doing the same
>> thing.
>>
>
> Ah that's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. I still agree with the move
> in principle, but how does that align with these:
>
> drivers/clk/clk-rpmi.c
> drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-rpmi-sysmsi.c
> include/linux/mailbox/riscv-rpmi-message.h
> drivers/mailbox/riscv-sbi-mpxy-mbox.c(Should be fine as it is just transport)
I am having separate discussion on u-boot mailing list about RPMI and it's usage
on non riscv architectures because one raised argument was that it is community
driver spec compare to SCMI which is owned by ARM. But IMHO only for riscv.
>
> Now I feel we need some alignment before making $subject move.
>
>> Based on that we had discussed about it with Vincent and Souvik (we missed
>> you there) about using SCMI on non ARM platform and both of them didn't see
>> the concern to be marked as ARM only protocol.
>> Truth is that some of protocols have ARM in description, file names, etc but
>> some of them not. That's why I think it is good time to sync it up and
>> enable
>> running this protocol on other SOCs.
>>
>>> ... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
>>> a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
>> I don't think it is going to be a big problem because it is just git mv
>> which git is able to gracefully handle.
>>
>
> Otherwise it may end up being unnecessary churn though I completely agree
> with the git/backporting aspects. Just don't want to churn things up until
> we have some plan and further changes/users of this move.
As I wrote above AMD/Xilinx platform with SCMI server where ARM RPU/APUs (with
multiple VMs) and Microblaze-V in programmable logic acting as separate agents
is going to be the first user. And for being able to run SCMI on Linux running
on Microblaze-V I need enable SCMI on non ARM architecture.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-10 7:42 ` Michal Simek
@ 2026-07-10 8:38 ` Sudeep Holla
2026-07-10 8:46 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2026-07-10 8:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: Cristian Marussi, Sudeep Holla, linux-kernel, monstr, git,
vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty, Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko,
Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu,
Fabio Estevam, Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron,
Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij,
Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown, Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá,
Pavel Machek, Peng Fan, Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd,
Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:42:09AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 7/10/26 09:35, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:03:32AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/9/26 17:56, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> > > > > SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> > > > > ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> > > > > rename folder to reflect it.
> > > >
> > > > While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
> > > > that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
> > > > not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
> > > > cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
> > > > see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
> > > > archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
> > >
> > > I have been in CC on U-Boot RPMI patches which got to my attention because
> > > I don't want to have another interface for MB-V(riscv-) running in
> > > programmable logic and have another server in the system doing the same
> > > thing.
> > >
> >
> > Ah that's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. I still agree with the move
> > in principle, but how does that align with these:
> >
> > drivers/clk/clk-rpmi.c
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-rpmi-sysmsi.c
> > include/linux/mailbox/riscv-rpmi-message.h
> > drivers/mailbox/riscv-sbi-mpxy-mbox.c(Should be fine as it is just transport)
>
> I am having separate discussion on u-boot mailing list about RPMI and it's
> usage on non riscv architectures because one raised argument was that it is
> community driver spec compare to SCMI which is owned by ARM. But IMHO only
> for riscv.
>
IIRC in LPC 2024, we did discuss opening up SCMI so that RISCV could use it as
is instead of copying quite a lot from SCMI for RPMI in some closed groups.
Here is the summary we got from couple of RISC-V vendors at the time:
"
RPMI is comparable to Arm SCMI, but it includes RISC-V-specific services such
as HART State Management, CPPC, Management Mode, and RAS Agent. The SBI MPXY
extension enables secure and non-secure system partitions to exchange RPMI
messages, allows an M-mode RPMI transport to be shared with S-mode, and lets
hypervisors virtualize RPMI for guests or VMs.
RPMI development is already well advanced, with much of the client-driver work
implemented in OpenSBI. Supervisor software can access selected RPMI services
through SBI MPXY. A permissively licensed reference implementation, librpmi,
is also available for platform vendors.
RPMI was created after evaluating Arm SCMI, mainly to support RISC-V-specific
requirements.
"
I didn't pursue it any further following some of these followup discussions
post LPC 2024.
> >
> > Now I feel we need some alignment before making $subject move.
> >
> > > Based on that we had discussed about it with Vincent and Souvik (we missed
> > > you there) about using SCMI on non ARM platform and both of them didn't see
> > > the concern to be marked as ARM only protocol.
> > > Truth is that some of protocols have ARM in description, file names, etc but
> > > some of them not. That's why I think it is good time to sync it up and
> > > enable
> > > running this protocol on other SOCs.
> > >
> > > > ... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
> > > > a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
> > > I don't think it is going to be a big problem because it is just git mv
> > > which git is able to gracefully handle.
> > >
> >
> > Otherwise it may end up being unnecessary churn though I completely agree
> > with the git/backporting aspects. Just don't want to churn things up until
> > we have some plan and further changes/users of this move.
>
> As I wrote above AMD/Xilinx platform with SCMI server where ARM RPU/APUs
> (with multiple VMs) and Microblaze-V in programmable logic acting as
> separate agents is going to be the first user. And for being able to run
> SCMI on Linux running on Microblaze-V I need enable SCMI on non ARM
> architecture.
>
Ah OK, if the plan is to just use SCMI as is and having "ARM/arm" name is
a blocker, then sure we can get that done. Hope you are aware of and already
considered some of the RISC-V specifics listed above and ruled out any of
those as concerns to use SCMI on RISC-V platforms.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-10 8:38 ` Sudeep Holla
@ 2026-07-10 8:46 ` Michal Simek
2026-07-10 8:59 ` Sudeep Holla
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2026-07-10 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudeep Holla
Cc: Cristian Marussi, linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot,
Souvik.Chakravarty, Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko,
Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu,
Fabio Estevam, Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron,
Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij,
Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown, Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá,
Pavel Machek, Peng Fan, Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd,
Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On 7/10/26 10:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:42:09AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/10/26 09:35, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:03:32AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/9/26 17:56, Cristian Marussi wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
>>>>>> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
>>>>>> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
>>>>>> rename folder to reflect it.
>>>>>
>>>>> While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
>>>>> that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
>>>>> not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
>>>>> cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
>>>>> see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
>>>>> archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
>>>>
>>>> I have been in CC on U-Boot RPMI patches which got to my attention because
>>>> I don't want to have another interface for MB-V(riscv-) running in
>>>> programmable logic and have another server in the system doing the same
>>>> thing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah that's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. I still agree with the move
>>> in principle, but how does that align with these:
>>>
>>> drivers/clk/clk-rpmi.c
>>> drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-rpmi-sysmsi.c
>>> include/linux/mailbox/riscv-rpmi-message.h
>>> drivers/mailbox/riscv-sbi-mpxy-mbox.c(Should be fine as it is just transport)
>>
>> I am having separate discussion on u-boot mailing list about RPMI and it's
>> usage on non riscv architectures because one raised argument was that it is
>> community driver spec compare to SCMI which is owned by ARM. But IMHO only
>> for riscv.
>>
>
> IIRC in LPC 2024, we did discuss opening up SCMI so that RISCV could use it as
> is instead of copying quite a lot from SCMI for RPMI in some closed groups.
>
> Here is the summary we got from couple of RISC-V vendors at the time:
> "
> RPMI is comparable to Arm SCMI, but it includes RISC-V-specific services such
> as HART State Management, CPPC, Management Mode, and RAS Agent. The SBI MPXY
> extension enables secure and non-secure system partitions to exchange RPMI
> messages, allows an M-mode RPMI transport to be shared with S-mode, and lets
> hypervisors virtualize RPMI for guests or VMs.
>
> RPMI development is already well advanced, with much of the client-driver work
> implemented in OpenSBI. Supervisor software can access selected RPMI services
> through SBI MPXY. A permissively licensed reference implementation, librpmi,
> is also available for platform vendors.
>
> RPMI was created after evaluating Arm SCMI, mainly to support RISC-V-specific
> requirements.
> "
>
> I didn't pursue it any further following some of these followup discussions
> post LPC 2024.
interesting. It looks like that they even didn't try to ARM about it.
>
>>>
>>> Now I feel we need some alignment before making $subject move.
>>>
>>>> Based on that we had discussed about it with Vincent and Souvik (we missed
>>>> you there) about using SCMI on non ARM platform and both of them didn't see
>>>> the concern to be marked as ARM only protocol.
>>>> Truth is that some of protocols have ARM in description, file names, etc but
>>>> some of them not. That's why I think it is good time to sync it up and
>>>> enable
>>>> running this protocol on other SOCs.
>>>>
>>>>> ... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
>>>>> a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
>>>> I don't think it is going to be a big problem because it is just git mv
>>>> which git is able to gracefully handle.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Otherwise it may end up being unnecessary churn though I completely agree
>>> with the git/backporting aspects. Just don't want to churn things up until
>>> we have some plan and further changes/users of this move.
>>
>> As I wrote above AMD/Xilinx platform with SCMI server where ARM RPU/APUs
>> (with multiple VMs) and Microblaze-V in programmable logic acting as
>> separate agents is going to be the first user. And for being able to run
>> SCMI on Linux running on Microblaze-V I need enable SCMI on non ARM
>> architecture.
>>
>
> Ah OK, if the plan is to just use SCMI as is and having "ARM/arm" name is
> a blocker, then sure we can get that done. Hope you are aware of and already
> considered some of the RISC-V specifics listed above and ruled out any of
> those as concerns to use SCMI on RISC-V platforms.
I know that we can't maintain SCMI and RPMI servers running on the same chip
doing the same things. We don't have space for it and make no sense to duplicate
testing on it too.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-10 8:46 ` Michal Simek
@ 2026-07-10 8:59 ` Sudeep Holla
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Sudeep Holla @ 2026-07-10 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: Cristian Marussi, Sudeep Holla, linux-kernel, monstr, git,
vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty, Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko,
Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu,
Fabio Estevam, Frank Li, Guenter Roeck, Jonathan Cameron,
Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown, Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij,
Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown, Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá,
Pavel Machek, Peng Fan, Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel,
Rafael J. Wysocki, Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd,
Ulf Hansson, Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 10:46:15AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 7/10/26 10:38, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:42:09AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/10/26 09:35, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 09:03:32AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 7/9/26 17:56, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > > > On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> > > > > > > SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> > > > > > > ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> > > > > > > rename folder to reflect it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While I understand dropping the dependency on ARM (I always wanted to do
> > > > > > that and test if it worked at all on some otehr archs with QEMU), I am
> > > > > > not sure about the whole renaming party ? why is needed just for
> > > > > > cosmetic reasons ? it is at the end an arm originated protocol so I dont
> > > > > > see it as a being wrong to be named as such even though used by other
> > > > > > archs...I have not really strong opinion on this...
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been in CC on U-Boot RPMI patches which got to my attention because
> > > > > I don't want to have another interface for MB-V(riscv-) running in
> > > > > programmable logic and have another server in the system doing the same
> > > > > thing.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ah that's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. I still agree with the move
> > > > in principle, but how does that align with these:
> > > >
> > > > drivers/clk/clk-rpmi.c
> > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-rpmi-sysmsi.c
> > > > include/linux/mailbox/riscv-rpmi-message.h
> > > > drivers/mailbox/riscv-sbi-mpxy-mbox.c(Should be fine as it is just transport)
> > >
> > > I am having separate discussion on u-boot mailing list about RPMI and it's
> > > usage on non riscv architectures because one raised argument was that it is
> > > community driver spec compare to SCMI which is owned by ARM. But IMHO only
> > > for riscv.
> > >
> >
> > IIRC in LPC 2024, we did discuss opening up SCMI so that RISCV could use it as
> > is instead of copying quite a lot from SCMI for RPMI in some closed groups.
> >
> > Here is the summary we got from couple of RISC-V vendors at the time:
> > "
> > RPMI is comparable to Arm SCMI, but it includes RISC-V-specific services such
> > as HART State Management, CPPC, Management Mode, and RAS Agent. The SBI MPXY
> > extension enables secure and non-secure system partitions to exchange RPMI
> > messages, allows an M-mode RPMI transport to be shared with S-mode, and lets
> > hypervisors virtualize RPMI for guests or VMs.
> >
> > RPMI development is already well advanced, with much of the client-driver work
> > implemented in OpenSBI. Supervisor software can access selected RPMI services
> > through SBI MPXY. A permissively licensed reference implementation, librpmi,
> > is also available for platform vendors.
> >
> > RPMI was created after evaluating Arm SCMI, mainly to support RISC-V-specific
> > requirements.
> > "
> >
> > I didn't pursue it any further following some of these followup discussions
> > post LPC 2024.
>
> interesting. It looks like that they even didn't try to ARM about it.
>
> >
> > > >
> > > > Now I feel we need some alignment before making $subject move.
> > > >
> > > > > Based on that we had discussed about it with Vincent and Souvik (we missed
> > > > > you there) about using SCMI on non ARM platform and both of them didn't see
> > > > > the concern to be marked as ARM only protocol.
> > > > > Truth is that some of protocols have ARM in description, file names, etc but
> > > > > some of them not. That's why I think it is good time to sync it up and
> > > > > enable
> > > > > running this protocol on other SOCs.
> > > > >
> > > > > > ... my concern really is ... wont this full scale rename simply generate
> > > > > > a lot of un-needed churn for future fixes and/or backporting ?
> > > > > I don't think it is going to be a big problem because it is just git mv
> > > > > which git is able to gracefully handle.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Otherwise it may end up being unnecessary churn though I completely agree
> > > > with the git/backporting aspects. Just don't want to churn things up until
> > > > we have some plan and further changes/users of this move.
> > >
> > > As I wrote above AMD/Xilinx platform with SCMI server where ARM RPU/APUs
> > > (with multiple VMs) and Microblaze-V in programmable logic acting as
> > > separate agents is going to be the first user. And for being able to run
> > > SCMI on Linux running on Microblaze-V I need enable SCMI on non ARM
> > > architecture.
> > >
> >
> > Ah OK, if the plan is to just use SCMI as is and having "ARM/arm" name is
> > a blocker, then sure we can get that done. Hope you are aware of and already
> > considered some of the RISC-V specifics listed above and ruled out any of
> > those as concerns to use SCMI on RISC-V platforms.
>
> I know that we can't maintain SCMI and RPMI servers running on the same chip
> doing the same things. We don't have space for it and make no sense to
> duplicate testing on it too.
>
That is very valid and compelling reason to re-use and agree with your
assessment. If you can make it work, go for it 😉.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 13:27 [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent Michal Simek
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2026-07-09 15:56 ` Cristian Marussi
@ 2026-07-09 16:07 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-07-10 6:01 ` Michal Simek
4 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2026-07-09 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Simek
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam,
Frank Li, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown,
Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Sudeep Holla, Ulf Hansson,
Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
> rename folder to reflect it.
> From specification perspective only ARM specific transport layers should be
> available on ARM/ARM64 architectures.
>
> That's why get rid of ARM prefix and description from documentation, file
> names, folder names, MODULE description, module names, Kconfig and
> comments.
> But keep origin Kconfig symbols not to break existing users.
>
> Hwmon, pinctrl, powercap, regulator, reset, clk and cpufreq scmi drivers
> already miss arm prefix that's why synchronize all of them to be without
> arm prefix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
> ---
>
> Likely I missed other locations but I wanted to send this RFC to have a
> discussion about it.
> ---
...
> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 2 +-
...
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
> index 2bfbcc033d59..cda0aedb36ca 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
> @@ -401,7 +401,7 @@ config SENSORS_ARCTIC_FAN_CONTROLLER
> will be called arctic_fan_controller.
>
> config SENSORS_ARM_SCMI
> - tristate "ARM SCMI Sensors"
> + tristate "SCMI Sensors"
> depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
> depends on THERMAL || !THERMAL_OF
> help
I agree in principle, but I don't see why this would have to be done
in a single patch. Also, both the Kconfig file (SENSORS_ARM_SCMI,
ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL) and the driver itself (""ARM SCMI HWMON interface
driver") still reference ARM.
Thanks,
Guenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread* Re: [RFC PATCH] firmware: scmi: Make SCMI arch independent
2026-07-09 16:07 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2026-07-10 6:01 ` Michal Simek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michal Simek @ 2026-07-10 6:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guenter Roeck
Cc: linux-kernel, monstr, git, vincent.guittot, Souvik.Chakravarty,
Alex Shi, Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Brian Masney,
Cristian Marussi, David Lechner, Dongliang Mu, Fabio Estevam,
Frank Li, Jonathan Cameron, Jonathan Corbet, Len Brown,
Liam Girdwood, Linus Walleij, Lukasz Luba, Mark Brown,
Michael Turquette, Nuno Sá, Pavel Machek, Peng Fan,
Pengutronix Kernel Team, Philipp Zabel, Rafael J. Wysocki,
Sascha Hauer, Shuah Khan, Stephen Boyd, Sudeep Holla, Ulf Hansson,
Viresh Kumar, Yanteng Si, arm-scmi,
open list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE,
linux-arm-kernel, open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK,
open list:DOCUMENTATION, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
open list:HARDWARE MONITORING,
open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS, open list:ENERGY MODEL
On 7/9/26 18:07, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 03:27:00PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On heterogenious systems like AMD/Xilinx FPGA there is a need to talk to
>> SCMI server from different architectures than ARM that's why remove
>> ARM/ARM64 Kconfig dependency with also remove ARM from description and
>> rename folder to reflect it.
>> From specification perspective only ARM specific transport layers should be
>> available on ARM/ARM64 architectures.
>>
>> That's why get rid of ARM prefix and description from documentation, file
>> names, folder names, MODULE description, module names, Kconfig and
>> comments.
>> But keep origin Kconfig symbols not to break existing users.
>>
>> Hwmon, pinctrl, powercap, regulator, reset, clk and cpufreq scmi drivers
>> already miss arm prefix that's why synchronize all of them to be without
>> arm prefix.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Likely I missed other locations but I wanted to send this RFC to have a
>> discussion about it.
>> ---
> ...
>> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 2 +-
> ...
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
>> index 2bfbcc033d59..cda0aedb36ca 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
>> @@ -401,7 +401,7 @@ config SENSORS_ARCTIC_FAN_CONTROLLER
>> will be called arctic_fan_controller.
>>
>> config SENSORS_ARM_SCMI
>> - tristate "ARM SCMI Sensors"
>> + tristate "SCMI Sensors"
>> depends on ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL
>> depends on THERMAL || !THERMAL_OF
>> help
>
> I agree in principle, but I don't see why this would have to be done
> in a single patch. Also, both the Kconfig file (SENSORS_ARM_SCMI,
> ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL) and the driver itself (""ARM SCMI HWMON interface
> driver") still reference ARM.
It should be split for sure. Just wanted to get initial feedback about this
change to show that it targets multiple locations.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread