Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp475508ybv; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 02:58:17 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqywJv2RVAA9rDjR5XctKHNmodztLDoSnwPQk/m4DHmSSoa0y4PZY1+ukqqPP7tevyJytSFO X-Received: by 2002:aca:560b:: with SMTP id k11mr1645597oib.53.1581073097508; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 02:58:17 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581073097; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=qp698r7EFjFbT1axD0Z9O54FWIXr7+b11z+RsjWDY79dxw4TkffrXy+c3ezQ/aNbe1 Wc7CxWXmrLVTZ5Y7iZOO30WHojbrnlU4Oe6G5Yu7eqOzXtXp+8/KW93ufX2uxTEtAjGt 0dobE5UIDiiX1PcxjV5MFZheyPXJQHexqxP8oC6Gsix9JrAAjWA+0PZo5DEISy91ypPA Cshm2RpUI9SQ6VVuaq/DC1CL+/RKp/2TwAdip3VM0SAcNH5y1IjaJnAyAEt10nU4t8Ui FlhOvLne3FOYcDV2J9QfRQJ+LQWN946gK/ngjtzfv0OfjE4IQLnV5qUzzwOR9AzESCMT eL+w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=WDpvz4KkqfUHEBcbvDViv/NrFU+AzjT5JiQewso1hy8=; b=yr9waGekKHj1FQUqxJgjNMWXET0Igu0RnEUTVlu/pCFJgc4ObkYtYRuPknnSdoK5KX f4qs19tyk4Siccu1jEAicxTx7jR52R9jUURxaCYlBb9Uwzi6dHCI6LDWMqc6d25VEahS gxnm/4Ms47CDy2Oa4stIqUl4m44YX8O2QX8pmc2jJ79aAy6WhZHVyk+cwZ/tS8FgK5lL RcAxxDDyTtJ5R23YRMLV6aENYWW8M/Goxre7HyRtMNPBfhxX1z3VN9ZH/wGOSVZQdgyM qYut2OSk/IS0xBoMIEOm135IEV/pirAdb4K2vqCPE4Y4hVo59RcXZzLSzQfr4n0QdYwq 2hFg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o6si3513151oie.193.2020.02.07.02.58.05; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 02:58:17 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727144AbgBGK4x (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 7 Feb 2020 05:56:53 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:38842 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727075AbgBGK4x (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Feb 2020 05:56:53 -0500 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 B480930E; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 02:56:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A1D83F52E; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 02:56:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:56:49 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Rob Herring Cc: peng.fan@nxp.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, f.fainelli@gmail.com, linux-imx@nxp.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, andre.przywara@arm.com, Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: arm,scmi: add smc/hvc transports Message-ID: <20200207105649.GC36345@bogus> References: <1580994086-17850-1-git-send-email-peng.fan@nxp.com> <1580994086-17850-2-git-send-email-peng.fan@nxp.com> <20200206215947.GA21514@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200206215947.GA21514@bogus> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 02:59:47PM -0700, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:01:25PM +0800, peng.fan@nxp.com wrote: > > From: Peng Fan > > > > SCMI could use SMC/HVC as tranports, so add into devicetree > > binding doc. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt > > index f493d69e6194..03cff8b55a93 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt > > @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Required properties: > > > > The scmi node with the following properties shall be under the /firmware/ node. > > > > -- compatible : shall be "arm,scmi" > > +- compatible : shall be "arm,scmi" or "arm,scmi-smc" > > - mboxes: List of phandle and mailbox channel specifiers. It should contain > > exactly one or two mailboxes, one for transmitting messages("tx") > > and another optional for receiving the notifications("rx") if > > @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ The scmi node with the following properties shall be under the /firmware/ node. > > protocol identifier for a given sub-node. > > - #size-cells : should be '0' as 'reg' property doesn't have any size > > associated with it. > > +- arm,smc-id : SMC id required when using smc transports > > +- arm,hvc-id : HVC id required when using hvc transports > > Don't the SMC ids get standardized? > Unfortunately no. Please don't ask me why ;) as there's no technical reason to not standardize it. I pushed hard for it, but for this particular case the SMC/HVC transport is considered to be outside the SCMI protocol standards as it's transport related. I completely agree it is total non-sense. I will try to convince them showing this discussion as reference but can't guarantee anything. -- Regards, Sudeep