Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-88251-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 10:27:44 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@oss.nxp.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] firmware: arm_scmi: add initial support for i.MX BBM
 protocol
Message-ID: <ZeGtoJ7ztSe8Kg8R@bogus>
References: <20240202-imx95-bbm-misc-v1-0-3cb743020933@nxp.com>
 <20240202-imx95-bbm-misc-v1-2-3cb743020933@nxp.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240202-imx95-bbm-misc-v1-2-3cb743020933@nxp.com>

On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 02:34:40PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> 
> The i.MX BBM protocol is for managing i.MX BBM module which provides
> RTC and BUTTON feature.

BBM as in NAND Bad Block Management ?

As mentioned elsewhere for other vendor protocol implementations,
please provide as much documentation on these extensions as possible.
Please use the SCMI spec as the reference to provide documentation
as I expected it to be versioned and all these needs to be documented
for maintenance of upstream support.

Also explain briefly why this needs to be vendor extension even if it is
obvious. I prefer that way.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep