From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 7D32C166F31; Thu, 19 Sep 2024 07:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726731607; cv=none; b=hSf3gwGA3/UyWkrOZIkm42JPwHA1l+y+GVfJ+po0CEUSltTTHehGxndbk1qKcHRmJ1PTVVpWTy24C8z2rnfQCZM16A7YsUMLqHIkhLEIdZiLltOH+n+Ab6EIBWpf52Te9QErEDuD0+jAzlfnVXGm5EGGcEEp9xLNDevhB8K6teo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726731607; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SKHiWuT9os4iwt/8Rac5rB767h2DJnB/vbFf5fmwPGk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PXelOo03sr6NacBhaF0v80KVRr5cskiSU5PgnkXt1xxr1VjIQFOgXko5PkyLXmWyDR9ArmtrwFH6bcTGSu1Sl7jVrEo4UB9l63htpH49H8EYsSexXXu/t4H6VR3c7D1GnTl853EOwBzDi+pvTkr5oogluy0lAQjEHQqzwV/C94A= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=F8fKW7ZT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="F8fKW7ZT" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3113DC4CEC4; Thu, 19 Sep 2024 07:40:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1726731607; bh=SKHiWuT9os4iwt/8Rac5rB767h2DJnB/vbFf5fmwPGk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F8fKW7ZTcay47pT/vW9S0y+4lE0fuNphqZeE6IY6af3wozhlOnLetyr4/nf7jP7Zy TETUSuGjCDJI9V2aSBGrSLKgUtEdgTmovhu6BQGjhkIZSBOe7PubY2Pt+4my0tnPz3 n6G1KDycUbajtzn0Nk9jzpB/JN42orDcCQqv5ZLw2axJjYpaL2s1TURRZvP7WAWPjW t7XS/y5z2RljkHluIhYezKh/Ns5ZMNXJHWDYWJatsGATCdcdLUUwDuCp4iTrPMJFEe SL+Hqb6B9fwmgw/fgMyRq8sw36XZz4WHHZzTUUGCAeYqZXOTglrKA3/s+hvhKcTdWO EkJDusAOtJy7A== Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 08:40:09 +0100 From: Conor Dooley To: Rob Herring Cc: Samuel Holland , Valentina Fernandez , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, peterlin@andestech.com, dminus@andestech.com, ycliang@andestech.com, jassisinghbrar@gmail.com, krzk+dt@kernel.org, andersson@kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, conor.dooley@microchip.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] dt-bindings: mailbox: add binding for Microchip IPC mailbox driver Message-ID: <20240919-useable-margarine-d6eefae9485c@squawk> References: <20240912170025.455167-1-valentina.fernandezalanis@microchip.com> <20240912170025.455167-3-valentina.fernandezalanis@microchip.com> <20240916-palpable-flock-7217424ed8db@spud> <20240918153558.GA1567736-robh@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="XW5QfXNOZ95nX152" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240918153558.GA1567736-robh@kernel.org> --XW5QfXNOZ95nX152 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 10:35:58AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 05:31:36PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 04:23:44PM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote: > > > Hi Valentina, > > >=20 > > > On 2024-09-12 12:00 PM, Valentina Fernandez wrote: > > > > Add a dt-binding for the Microchip Inter-Processor Communication (I= PC) > > > > mailbox controller. > > > >=20 > > > > Signed-off-by: Valentina Fernandez > > > > --- > > > > .../bindings/mailbox/microchip,sbi-ipc.yaml | 115 ++++++++++++++= ++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 115 insertions(+) > > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/micro= chip,sbi-ipc.yaml > > > >=20 > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/microchip,sb= i-ipc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/microchip,sbi-ipc.ya= ml > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > index 000000000000..dc2cbd5eb28f > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/microchip,sbi-ipc.y= aml > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ > > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) > > > > +%YAML 1.2 > > > > +--- > > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mailbox/microchip,sbi-ipc.yaml# > > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > > > + > > > > +title: Microchip Inter-processor communication (IPC) mailbox contr= oller > > > > + > > > > +maintainers: > > > > + - Valentina Fernandez > > > > + > > > > +description: > > > > + The Microchip Inter-processor Communication (IPC) facilitates > > > > + message passing between processors using an interrupt signaling > > > > + mechanism. > > > > + This SBI interface is compatible with the Mi-V Inter-hart > > > > + Communication (IHC) IP. > > > > + The microchip,sbi-ipc compatible string is inteded for use by so= ftware > > > > + running in supervisor privileged mode (s-mode). The SoC-specific > > > > + compatibles are inteded for use by the SBI implementation in mac= hine > > > > + mode (m-mode). > > >=20 > > > There is a lot of conditional logic in this binding for how small it = is. Would > > > it make sense to split this into two separate bindings? For example, = with the > > > current binding microchip,ihc-chan-disabled-mask is allowed for the S= BI > > > interface, but doesn't look like it belongs there. > >=20 > > I dunno. Part of me says that because this is two compatibles for the > > same piece of hardware (the choice depending on which programming model > > you use) they should be documented together. The other part of me is of > > the opinion that they effectively describe different things, given one > > describes the hardware and the other describes a firmware interface that > > may have any sort of hardware backing it. > >=20 > > I suppose it's more of a problem for "us" (that being me/Rob/Krzysztof) > > than for Valentina, and how to handle firmware interfaces to hardware > > like this is one of the topics that's planned for Krzysztof's devicetree > > BoF session at LPC. >=20 > If how the client interacts with the device is fundamentally different,= =20 > then I think different compatibles is fine. It wasn't about different compatibles (which I think are non-debatable here) it's whether or not the different compatibles should be in their own binding files. --XW5QfXNOZ95nX152 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZuvVVgAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0ogwAP9aQ00DhFSZtkfdD4M6IsRJi3SNUC6DmPJlEz0PltPCegD9FJcnmg8ZE6Dm 4HbBn/9l40PyHree8TdGYaQazOxWIwU= =QgG+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XW5QfXNOZ95nX152--