From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
To: tanmay.shah@amd.com
Cc: andersson@kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org,
robh@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
michal.simek@amd.com, ben.levinsky@amd.com,
linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: xlnx: add auto boot feature
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 18:53:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67f442f7-377d-46f3-82bc-86053e34c277@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <faef3c54-2292-4470-be6a-4c347ca65453@amd.com>
On 23/04/2026 19:59, Shah, Tanmay wrote:
> Ack, I will rename it to xlnx,auto-boot.
>
>>>
>>>>> + type: boolean
>>>>> + description: remote core is either already running or ready to boot
>>>>
>>>> And why is this property of a board?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure what indicates it is? The property is under remoteproc child
>>> device that is SOC level property. Remote core is on same SOC wher linux
>>> core is running.
>>
>> So it is implied by SoC compatible? Please provide some arguments why it
>> cannot be implied by the SoC compatible. I gave you one way out, but if
>> you disagree then no problem.
>>
>
> So on some SoC, the bootloader supports loading and starting of the
> remote processor. But it is totally user's choice. User can choose to
> load & start one core of a cluster via bootloader and leave another core
> powered-off.
> That is why it is not possible to decide based on SoC compatible.
OK. The problem is that "user" is a bit vague and usually user choice
goes to user-space.
The property will be set or unset for ALL of given boards. So all of the
DTS->DTB. That's why it should be clear why all such boards should
behave like you described. If this is truly user, as in user-space,
choice, then DT is not the way.
>
> If we don't want to make it a device-tree property then I can implement
> in a different way. New way will detect if the remote is running or not
> via EMMI/SCMI call to the firmware, and take a decision based on that.
> If this new way works, then I don't think we need auto-boot property at all.
>
> Let me know your thoughts.
This works for me and solves my questions from DT point of view, but I
cannot judge whether this makes sense for you.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-24 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-22 20:25 [PATCH 0/2] remoteproc: xlnx: add auto-boot support Tanmay Shah
2026-04-22 20:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: xlnx: add auto boot feature Tanmay Shah
2026-04-23 9:09 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-23 15:14 ` Shah, Tanmay
2026-04-23 17:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-23 17:59 ` Shah, Tanmay
2026-04-24 16:53 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
2026-04-24 17:52 ` Shah, Tanmay
2026-04-28 14:30 ` Mathieu Poirier
2026-04-28 14:38 ` Shah, Tanmay
2026-04-22 20:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: xlnx: enable " Tanmay Shah
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=67f442f7-377d-46f3-82bc-86053e34c277@kernel.org \
--to=krzk@kernel.org \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=ben.levinsky@amd.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=michal.simek@amd.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=tanmay.shah@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox