From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA3C12D76E; Thu, 4 Jul 2024 10:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720089403; cv=none; b=ljwo0GzH4XkDnGWb/Ps8T/ZeCRRfGuMXdGrOnm9NIuTqSH8Rs1bZgzjrRmuSzXfvSI+MExe1fKOog/RPuciuq1y6FYS8cUcBMayw09APV939O4rXfUJskvixJaaiOhHfKEks3vPHqgXER70nsSDLiIOHYnUuvQU4/Dzrdyv++a0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720089403; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tc+zXpW5EumM4Y5w1BQmomPKVoA3wzt9NxV5ihkiHlI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TAKlEE5JT2U5vpMSoDrqz+rD5dyx7SH1ueYbPqyLK6i+CsMXvxx794lwufd0CGFVTq86dEX1DfM2rtvD4qhkNv99Uh0u4jf11l7MDCocI66rnwPEZli2XRzORdLI03N8DGE7zbd5+f4+mRTABviIJFsBPbM6E7VrnP5ZdtXNn8Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com 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 0DACF367; Thu, 4 Jul 2024 03:37:06 -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 4933B3F762; Thu, 4 Jul 2024 03:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 11:36:36 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: "Peng Fan (OSS)" Cc: cristian.marussi@arm.com, robh@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Peng Fan Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms Message-ID: References: <20240703031715.379815-1-peng.fan@oss.nxp.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: <20240703031715.379815-1-peng.fan@oss.nxp.com> On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:17:14AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > From: Peng Fan > > System Controller Management Interface(SCMI) firmwares might have > different designs by SCMI firmware developers. So the maximum receive > channel timeout value might also varies in the various designs. > > So introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms to let each platform could > set its own timeout value in device tree. > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan > --- > > V2: > Drop defaults, update description. > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > index ebf384e76df1..dcac0b36c76f 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > @@ -121,6 +121,12 @@ properties: > atomic mode of operation, even if requested. > default: 0 > > + max-rx-timeout-ms: > + description: > + An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, representing the > + mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The value should > + be a non-zero value if set. > + IIRC, you had the min and max constraint in the earlier response. You need to have rushed and posted another version before I could respond with my preference. So there is no rush, these are v6.12 material. Take time for respining and give some time for the review. -- Regards, Sudeep