Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] dt-bindings: soc: qcom,smsm: Allow specifying mboxes instead of qcom,ipc

[Luca Weiss <luca@z3ntu.xyz>]

On Montag, 20. Mai 2024 08:46:39 MESZ Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/05/2024 17:06, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> > 
> > Any feedback on the below topic?
> 
> Can be explained in description, like
> mboxes:
>   description: Each entry corresponds to one remote processor
>   maxItems: 5

Hi Krzysztof

Ack, sounds good.

Maybe also from you, any opinion between these two binding styles?

So first using index of mboxes for the numbering, where for the known
usages the first element (and sometimes the 3rd - ipc-2) are empty <>.

The second variant is using mbox-names to get the correct channel-mbox
mapping.

-               qcom,ipc-1 = <&apcs 8 13>;
-               qcom,ipc-2 = <&apcs 8 9>;
-               qcom,ipc-3 = <&apcs 8 19>;
+               mboxes = <0>, <&apcs 13>, <&apcs 9>, <&apcs 19>;

vs.

-               qcom,ipc-1 = <&apcs 8 13>;
-               qcom,ipc-2 = <&apcs 8 9>;
-               qcom,ipc-3 = <&apcs 8 19>;
+               mboxes = <&apcs 13>, <&apcs 9>, <&apcs 19>;
+               mbox-names = "ipc-1", "ipc-2", "ipc-3";

Regards
Luca

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
>