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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B93EC3271E for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2024 14:56:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=xvxqDFqUW7LStcqKHRGMH232OGH22eHLkCP0WxqzshA=; b=MfD6d5q4j/VqKHeOE35ctsM66P 47b/+qyrjj/xF0FBZutlisvkNVzhql79Ooql72b/kDDBe4sPdju52QS7h2uuOpUQxvucFZFP2xUjh RD2pmwUAxo8GAakpMgT9EteYJyydlXnRE16SGzLVbddpt6Oy8u1049U8eu9MgU9NfOVArjE0VAd1a sluaj6+PpXGjpEWIGIBBau7OkpAvTXILLs2X9PgnI30U4WnXyyg3GT2YbpL6V8b0BFYWe0HHr+pn1 nseTVs+ZG5ZIh92DotZw/SuE8IB3l2u7rIdoH4Mp9U2SYcQ9CQv3VpbDgtmHyi8H1aH+rfMP67VvW HfFjcLjQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sQpmR-000000048xH-3SfH; Mon, 08 Jul 2024 14:55:51 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sQpmC-000000048tt-3UDt for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2024 14:55:38 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B3C1042; Mon, 8 Jul 2024 07:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E6513F641; Mon, 8 Jul 2024 07:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 15:55:30 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Peng Fan Cc: Cristian Marussi , Sudeep Holla , "Peng Fan (OSS)" , "robh@kernel.org" , "krzk+dt@kernel.org" , "conor+dt@kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms Message-ID: References: <20240703031715.379815-1-peng.fan@oss.nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240708_075536_983002_E3F60179 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 39.87 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 11:48:31PM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce > > property mbox-rx-timeout-ms > > > > On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 12:33:09PM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: > > > > introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 10:39:53AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: > > > > > > introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:17:14AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: Peng Fan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > System Controller Management Interface(SCMI) firmwares > > might > > > > > > have > > > > > > > different designs by SCMI firmware developers. So the > > maximum > > > > > > receive > > > > > > > channel timeout value might also varies in the various designs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms to let each > > platform > > > > > > > could set its own timeout value in device tree. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > V2: > > > > > > > Drop defaults, update description. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > | 6 > > > > > > ++++++ > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > > > > > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > > > > > > index ebf384e76df1..dcac0b36c76f 100644 > > > > > > > --- > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > > > > > > +++ > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > > > > > > @@ -121,6 +121,12 @@ properties: > > > > > > > atomic mode of operation, even if requested. > > > > > > > default: 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + max-rx-timeout-ms: > > > > > > > + description: > > > > > > > + An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, > > > > > > > + representing > > > > > > the > > > > > > > + mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The > > > > > > > + value > > > > > > should > > > > > > > + be a non-zero value if set. > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > IIRC, you had the min and max constraint in the earlier response. > > > > > > You need to have rushed and posted another version before I > > > > > > could respond with my preference. > > > > > > > > > > > > So there is no rush, these are v6.12 material. Take time for > > > > > > respining and give some time for the review. > > > > > > > > > > Sure. I just not sure what the maximum should be set, so I drop > > > > > the minimum and maximum from my previous email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Worst case we can just have min constraint to indicate it must be > > > > non- zero value as you have mentioned above and drop that > > statement > > > > as it becomes explicit with the constraint. > > > > > > I'll use below in v3: > > > max-rx-timeout-ms: > > > description: > > > An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, representing > > the > > > mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The value > > should > > > be a non-zero value if set. > > > minimum: 1 > > > > > > Put the binding away, when you have time, please check whether the > > > driver changes are good or not. > > > BTW, since our Android team is waiting for this patchset got R-b or > > > A-b, then the patches could be accepted by Google common kernel, > > we > > > could support GKI in our release which is soon in near days. So I am > > > being pushed :) > > > > Hi Peng, > > > > once the bindings are accepted I wanted to fold also this series of yours > > in my transport rework series. > > No problem, feel free to take it into your series, I will post out V3 later(wait > if Sudeep is ok with I add minimum 1 or not), but v3 2/2 should be same > as v2 2/2. > Still not taken in transport rework V1, but not forgotten :D Thanks, Cristian