From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFD51C004D4 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 17:09:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796C585665; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 18:09:53 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 3931685667; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 18:09:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A975485657 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 18:09:49 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sudeep.holla@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 95CCC176A; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:10:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (unknown [10.57.77.84]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B1443F445; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:09:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 17:09:45 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Tom Rini Cc: Simon Glass , Abdellatif El Khlifi , achin.gupta@arm.com, xueliang.zhong@arm.com, Drew.Reed@arm.com, robh@kernel.org, jens.wiklander@linaro.org, ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org, u-boot@lists.denx.de, Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 03/10] arm_ffa: introduce Arm FF-A low-level driver Message-ID: <20230119170945.cppg6irr7a26sv7n@bogus> References: <20230118124923.GB631605@bill-the-cat> <20230118135932.GC631605@bill-the-cat> <20230119163157.GA18384@e121910.cambridge.arm.com> <20230119164652.llh66rapyqqej63f@bogus> <20230119165744.GG631605@bill-the-cat> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20230119165744.GG631605@bill-the-cat> X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:57:44AM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > > But it's also true that at run-time, within U-Boot, we can modify the > device tree we have, with live tree yes? So, the whole series in > question here can be done without modifying the base DT and getting in > to the further discussions that doing so entails. The assertion is that > the software discoverable bus here is sufficient to not need DT, so, OK, > lets go. OK, may be I am not up-to-date on the U-Boot. IIUC, the modifications done in the DT by U-Boot is mostly for consumption by the next stage loader/OS and not for self-consumption. But if it is for self consumption, then good. It helps especially for the subnodes(as Simon referred) or the partitions that can be discovered at run-time using FF-A interface. As mentioned I am not again DT, it is just not needed and especially for subnodes it could result in inconsistency b/w what is in DT and what the firmware provides. As mentioned in previous response, having a simple node that Simon provided as example earlier is fine by me if that is the only option to make progress as I just feel it is redundant and one can say not scalable(but that is debatable again 😄). In short, I am not concerned about having simple node, just don't like to see entire FF-A bus enumerated in DT as subnodes for reasons mentioned already. -- Regards, Sudeep