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 F29EB1C5F0C; Wed, 19 Feb 2025 10:17:52 +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=1739960276; cv=none; b=lVtBISD1xTVzPqEdx2t+3pAbEEkyHOxSP/XNLJ/g5MnOMx8+yRQkSVi3rMz+u06SA2AftHkexNicOkv2yR5pqbL9BsffoV820aYCRhlexSA5J9pp66hTJqkddrLn8ZfEFW8bbpxXpvSZJDTSAZK29eW6E3Zb1OPF1kOX2/4vIAc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739960276; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DuYlt34xD1e3j0IA7LTc8PQr3bNRl2dT3bWTNzleND4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qPEiFgh2hYc1HaiOLlNu2zbS3ayULu/kPb/P339XU3itBnR6/SKpaKJ/EO8KgcxdNVB1G6VZTAD8uHYSGt7iFPueOlSGzSU6mGDRoD+e9y3igxwDzEPk5h2CGQJgmkUSi166+3GMFXoMKo0Mr/XhBTpA2o/mFksQqO8IxPOXxd8= 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 D3CCD1682; Wed, 19 Feb 2025 02:18:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (e133711.arm.com [10.1.196.55]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6A6503F6A8; Wed, 19 Feb 2025 02:17:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 10:17:46 +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> <20250218133619.GA22647@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: <20250218133619.GA22647@nxa18884-linux> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 09:36:19PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 10:24:52AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > >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 > > Would you mind share more info on other cases that SCMI not as firmware > interface? > > >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. > > The issues are common to SCMI, not i.MX specific. > I just propose potential solutions. You are the SCMI maintainer, there > is no chance to get bindings approved without you. > I am not blocking you. What I mentioned is I don't agree that DT can be used to resolve this issue, but I don't have time or alternate solution ATM. So if you propose DT based solution and the maintainers agree for the proposed bindings I will take a look and help you to make that work. But I will raise any objections I may have if the proposal has issues mainly around the compatibility and ease of maintenance. > No more ideas from me. Leave this to you in case you have better solution. > Unfortunately no, I don't have one. I haven't had time to sit and explore the issue and think of any solution yet. -- Regards, Sudeep