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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F1EC47082 for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 08:20:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8499E61248 for ; Mon, 31 May 2021 08:20:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230288AbhEaIWU (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2021 04:22:20 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:50898 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230070AbhEaIWT (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 May 2021 04:22:19 -0400 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 257CA6D; Mon, 31 May 2021 01:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (unknown [10.57.72.241]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D67573F73D; Mon, 31 May 2021 01:20:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 09:20:24 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Rob Herring Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Cristian Marussi , Kevin Hilman , Neil Armstrong , Jerome Brunet Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scpi: Move arm,scpi-shmem to json schema Message-ID: <20210531082002.spu73u7n35n53lqp@bogus> References: <20210526182807.548118-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20210526182807.548118-2-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20210527202554.GA1351447@robh.at.kernel.org> <20210531081548.jxovuqattu2fg73o@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210531081548.jxovuqattu2fg73o@bogus> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 09:15:48AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:25:54PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 07:28:00PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > Move the SRAM and shared memory binding for SCPI into the existing > > > Generic on-chip SRAM. We just need to update the compatible list and > > > there-by remove the whole old text format binding for the same. > > > > > > Cc: Rob Herring > > > Cc: Kevin Hilman > > > Cc: Neil Armstrong > > > Cc: Jerome Brunet > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > > > --- > > > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt | 15 --------------- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml | 1 + > > > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt > > > index bcd6c3ec471e..bcb8b3d61e68 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt > > > @@ -56,21 +56,6 @@ Sub-nodes > > > node. It can be non linear and hence provide the mapping of identifiers > > > into the clock-output-names array. > > > > > > -SRAM and Shared Memory for SCPI > > > -------------------------------- > > > - > > > -A small area of SRAM is reserved for SCPI communication between application > > > -processors and SCP. > > > - > > > -The properties should follow the generic mmio-sram description found in [3] > > > - > > > -Each sub-node represents the reserved area for SCPI. > > > - > > > -Required sub-node properties: > > > -- reg : The base offset and size of the reserved area with the SRAM > > > -- compatible : should be "arm,scp-shmem" for Non-secure SRAM based > > > > > + - arm,scpi-shmem > > > > Which is correct? There's not a single other occurrance in the kernel > > tree of either. > > > > Right I was thinking removing it but wasn't sure if any downstream DTS > have used this as it has been in the binding for a while now. > Sent it too early before I completed, we don't have explicit check for these compatible in the code. We just use phandles directly. -- Regards, Sudeep