Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: Add qcom specific hvc transport for SCMI

Nikunj Kela
2023-07-18T18:18:54Z

On 7/18/2023 11:12 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 18/07/2023 18:08, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>> Introduce compatible "qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem" for SCMI
>> transport channel for Qualcomm virtual platforms.
>> The compatible mandates a shared memory channel.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela <quic_nkela@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>> .../bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 69 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
>> index b138f3d23df8..605b1e997a85 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
>> @@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ properties:
>> - description: SCMI compliant firmware with OP-TEE transport
>> items:
>> - const: linaro,scmi-optee
>> + - description: SCMI compliant firmware with Qualcomm hvc/shmem transport
>> + items:
>> + - const: qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem
>>
>> interrupts:
>> description:
>> @@ -321,6 +324,16 @@ else:
>> required:
>> - linaro,optee-channel-id
>>
>> + else:
>> + if:
>> + properties:
>> + compatible:
>> + contains:
>> + const: qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem
>> + then:
>> + required:
>> + - shmem
> Unfortunately this pattern if-else-if-else-if-else does not scale well.
> Please convert all entries first to allOf:if:then,if:then,if:then (in
> new patch), and then add new if:then:
Ok!
>
>> +
>> examples:
>> - |
>> firmware {
>> @@ -444,6 +457,62 @@ examples:
>> };
>> };
>>
>> + - |
>> + firmware {
>> + scmi_dpu {
> No underscores in node names.
>
> Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
> examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
> https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
ACK!
>
>
>
>> + compatible = "qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem";
>> + shmem = <&shmem_dpu>;
>> +
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> + scmi_pd_dpu: protocol@11 {
>> + reg = <0x11>;
>> + #power-domain-cells = <1>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
> Add only one example, but then only if it differs significantly. I see
> no differences - except compatible - so maybe no point of examples.
Other than the compatible, it also doesn't require smc-id, we read it
from shmem region.  Will remove examples.
>
>
>> + scmi_gpu {
>> + compatible = "qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem";
>> + shmem = <&shmem_gpu>;
> This example for sure is not needed - you duplicate above.
Right, will remove this example.
>
>> +
>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 931 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>> + interrupt-names = "a2p";
>> +
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> + scmi_pd_gpu: protocol@11 {
>> + reg = <0x11>;
>> + #power-domain-cells = <1>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + soc {
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> +
>> + sram@95c00000 {
>> + compatible = "mmio-sram";
>> + reg = <0x95c00000 0x10000>;
>> +
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges;
>> +
>> + shmem_dpu: scmi-sram-dpu@95c00000 {
>> + compatible = "arm,scmi-shmem";
>> + reg = <0x95c00000 0x3f0>;
>> + };
> How does these differ from existing example?

It doesn't. Will remove the example as suggested. Thanks

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>