Re: [PATCH v7 3/6] dt-bindings: mailbox: imx-mu: add generic MU channel support

From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
To: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Cc: "A.s. Dong" <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Devicetree List <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, ",
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	srv_heupstream"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	", Sascha Hauer" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>,
	dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/6] dt-bindings: mailbox: imx-mu: add generic MU channel support
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 16:44:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180730144435.srxgohwgdhrmw2rz@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABb+yY3PLcjduxm7uJ9xZpPP2zkcQ5Qngs4PjnhGAXp43QVzFA@mail.gmail.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1610 bytes --]

On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 06:34:56PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > Hi Aishen, Jassie,
> >
> > i'm lost in this discussion. Please, as soon as I need to add some
> > changes to my patches, notify me. Preferably on top for email.
> >
> I am ok with however you choose to implement, 8 unidirectional or 4
> bidirectional channels or whatever.
> 
> We just can't have protocol specific s/w modes in the controller drivers.
> 
> The best solution is to fix the SCU firmware. If that is _really_
> impossible, I provided a solution (3 cells work around). If you have a
> better idea please feel free to propose and implement that.
> 
> It will also help if you could share the user code of "scu-mode". If
> there is no such code (and we know the driver doesn't respect the
> "scu-mode" property) why do we even have that binding? Maybe drop it.

Tomorrow I have a time slot to address your generic iMX MU suggestions.
So, what is better, uni- or bi-directional channels? Should I implement
*all* (4TX+FIFO, 4RX+FIFO, 4TX-simple, 4RX-simple) channels in this run?
If yes, how should it be reflected in DT?
- 1 cell: &mu [0-15]
- 2 cells: &mu [0-7] [TX,RX]
- 3 cells: &mu [0-4] [FIFO,NOFIFO] [TX,RX]

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel