From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 724347ED for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 10:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9CAAC; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 03:44:08 -0700 (PDT) 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 C27DDC15; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 03:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D69413F5A1; Tue, 3 Oct 2023 03:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 11:44:04 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Nikunj Kela Cc: cristian.marussi@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, andersson@kernel.org, konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] dt-bindings: arm: Add new compatible for smc/hvc transport for SCMI Message-ID: <20231003104404.o7yxg3y7dn7uhrq4@bogus> References: <20230718160833.36397-1-quic_nkela@quicinc.com> <20230911194359.27547-1-quic_nkela@quicinc.com> <20230911194359.27547-4-quic_nkela@quicinc.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230911194359.27547-4-quic_nkela@quicinc.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 12:43:58PM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote: > Introduce compatible "qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem" for SCMI smc/hvc > transport channel for Qualcomm virtual platforms. > The compatible mandates a shared memory channel. > > Signed-off-by: Nikunj Kela > Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > index 8d54ea768d38..4090240f45b1 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 Can it be simply "qcom,scmi-smc" for 2 reasons ? 1. We don't support SMC/HVC without shmem, so what is your argument to add '-shmem' in the compatible here ? 2. The exact conduit(SMC/HVC) used is detected runtime, so I prefer to keep '-smc' instead of '-hvc' in the compatible just to avoid giving an illusion that HVC is the conduit chosen here based on the compatible. It can be true for other reason but I don't want to mislead here by using HVC. > > interrupts: > description: > @@ -320,6 +323,15 @@ allOf: > required: > - linaro,optee-channel-id > > + - if: > + properties: > + compatible: > + contains: > + const: qcom,scmi-hvc-shmem > + then: > + required: > + - shmem > + > examples: > - | > firmware { > -- > 2.17.1 > -- Regards, Sudeep