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 97B3D233157; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 10:24:59 +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=1739874301; cv=none; b=Fk24vHE96QZvnwKf8AttFoRi7zDl3v6qOb9i3mp+dktXzm0Qfq405cEnN2Y4YB6T3OgJXv/lalciLlXOqu2tZ1uA+5qiZHEBRk+a5CK0KS7G6HSyBFJpK/2/UjX/W6sR43cvo2qJE8bfSspEhLRihyxlLl80GL6ZO6HR6qohFRI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739874301; c=relaxed/simple; bh=m8OhKUntbc2SaOGNpmwf8cIjYThX9QnKGC7Wo5pVxvk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=iIyX4cfA1dLGp2bM/m72jyDKahFkAbTOoeJbSC0F8j7ZstAVw+OzABJRzmGi5/B4qbrCnSSzG/qnIY8hv3bqDQDOIg6rPJMlcEsEOZ3EukXvCG9jGHOXhHwKFkryFB2IMkAg1mClw4u+jXeBa3z9b8/kb/t8SOaNyg/BwLflp1Q= 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 8451D13D5; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 02:25:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (e133711.arm.com [10.1.196.55]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 811B93F6A8; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 02:24:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 10:24:52 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Peng Fan Cc: Cristian Marussi , Sudeep Holla , Saravana Kannan , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linus Walleij , Dong Aisheng , Fabio Estevam , Shawn Guo , Jacky Bai , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Sascha Hauer , , , , , , Peng Fan Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] firmware: arm_scmi: bus: Bypass setting fwnode for scmi cpufreq Message-ID: References: <20241225-scmi-fwdevlink-v1-0-e9a3a5341362@nxp.com> <20241225-scmi-fwdevlink-v1-1-e9a3a5341362@nxp.com> <20250212070120.GD15796@localhost.localdomain> <20250218010949.GB22580@nxa18884-linux> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@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: <20250218010949.GB22580@nxa18884-linux> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 09:09:49AM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > A potential solution is not using reg in the protocol nodes. Define nodes > as below: > devperf { > compatible ="arm,scmi-devperf"; > } > > cpuperf { > compatible ="arm,scmi-cpuperf"; > } > > pinctrl { > compatible ="arm,scmi-pinctrl"; > } > > The reg is coded in driver. > > But the upper requires restruction of scmi framework. > > Put the above away, could we first purse a simple way first to address > the current bug in kernel? Just as I prototyped here: > https://github.com/MrVan/linux/tree/b4/scmi-fwdevlink-v2 > Good luck getting these bindings merged. I don't like it as it is pushing software policy or issues into to the devicetree. What we have as SCMI binding is more than required for a firmware interface IMO. So, you are on your own to get these bindings approved as I am not on board with these but if you convince DT maintainers, I will have a look at it then to see if we can make that work really. -- Regards, Sudeep