Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 30 Jun 2023 11:38:47 +0100
From:   Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
To:     Oleksii Moisieiev <Oleksii_Moisieiev@epam.com>
Cc:     "sudeep.holla@arm.com" <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.2 pincontrol
 protocol basic support
Message-ID: <ZJ6wtw7mz/FjBcx6@e120937-lin>
References: <cover.1686063941.git.oleksii_moisieiev@epam.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cover.1686063941.git.oleksii_moisieiev@epam.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 04:22:26PM +0000, Oleksii Moisieiev wrote:
> This Patch series is intended to introduce the potential generic driver for
> pin controls over SCMI protocol, provided in the latest beta version of DEN0056 [0].
> 
> On ARM-based systems, a separate Cortex-M based System Control Processor (SCP)
> provides control on pins, as well as with power, clocks, reset controllers. In this case,
> kernel should use one of the possible transports, described in [0] to access SCP and
> control clocks/power-domains etc. This driver is using SMC transport to communicate with SCP via
> SCMI protocol and access to the Pin Control Subsystem.
> 

Hi Oleksii,

sorry this review has been a bit delayed, I tested V3 in my setup and found no
practical issue. I'll post a few comments/remarks along the series.

Beside addressing pending comments, I suppose that the next step will be anyway
to address the upcoming changes in the new v3.2 BETA regarding support for
multiple type/value set/get operations as requested by Peng.

Thanks,
Cristian