Re: [PATCH 0/5] Exynos850 APM-to-AP mailbox support

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 02/04/2026 04:19, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> On Sat Mar 21, 2026 at 10:44 AM GMT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 09:15:12PM +0000, Alexey Klimov wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> This patch series introduces support for the APM-to-AP mailbox on the 
>>> Exynos850 SoC. This mailbox is required for communicating with the APM 
>>> co-processor using ACPM.
>>>
>>> The Exynos850 mailbox operates similarly to the existing gs101 
>>> implementation, but the register offsets and IRQ mask bits differ. 
>>> This series abstracts these differences into platform-specific data 
>>> structures matched via the device tree.
>>>
>>> Also, it requires APM-to-AP mailbox clock in CMU_APM block.
>>>
>>> In theory this can be split into two series with correct dependecies:
>>> device tree node requires clock changes to be merged. The suggestion
>>> is to let this go through Samsung SoC tree with corresponding acks
>>> if it is okay.
>>
>> I don't understand why this cannot be split into two seris
>> *practically*. What is exactly the dependency between mailbox and DTS,
>> that it had to be combined here?
> 
> Do you suggest to send 3 single patches with proper dependencies
> description? DT bindings change first, then mailbox change that specifically
> depends on dt-bindings change and then dts update (which will depend on both)?
> 
> I thought that mbox driver change depends implicitly on bindings update?

Please don't answer to a question with a question. Actually three
questions. If you cannot give argument why there is a dependency, feels
to me like you send something you do not understand.

Best regards,
Krzysztof