Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] firmware: meson_sm: Add secure power domain support

From: Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@amlogic.com>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>, <linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
	Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>,
	Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>,
	<linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Jian Hu <jian.hu@amlogic.com>,
	Hanjie Lin <hanjie.lin@amlogic.com>,
	Victor Wan <victor.wan@amlogic.com>,
	Xingyu Chen <xingyu.chen@amlogic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] firmware: meson_sm: Add secure power domain support
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 22:59:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d14fc01-f903-c008-631f-eeb0b4a335f0@amlogic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7heeyecw8d.fsf@baylibre.com>

Hi Kevin,

On 2019/11/11 22:40, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> writes:
> 
>> Hi Kevin,
>>
>> Please see my comments below:
>>
>> On 2019/11/10 4:11, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>> Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> The Amlogic Meson A1/C1 Secure Monitor implements calls to control power
>>>> domain.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@amlogic.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/firmware/meson/meson_sm.c       | 2 ++
>>>>  include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h | 2 ++
>>>>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>
>> [...]
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h b/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h
>>>> index 6669e2a..4ed3989 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h
>>>> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ enum {
>>>>  	SM_EFUSE_WRITE,
>>>>  	SM_EFUSE_USER_MAX,
>>>>  	SM_GET_CHIP_ID,
>>>> +	SM_PWRC_SET,
>>>> +	SM_PWRC_GET,
>>>
>>> These new IDs are unique to the A1/C1 family.  Maybe we should add a
>>> prefix to better indicate that.  Maybe:
>>>
>>>        SM_A1_PWRC_SET,
>>>        SM_A1_PWRC_GET,
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> I consulted with the internal VLSI team, and it's likely that the latter new SOC will follow A1/C1.
>> And then it may become common function in the future.
> 
> OK, but it's not a common function for the past, so it's useful to mark
> that distinction.
> 
> Just like in device-tree, we often have compatibles named for previous
> SoC families (e.g. "gxbb") used on newer SoCs, but we use that to mean
> "GXBB or newer".
> 
> Similarily here, we can use SM_A1_ prefix to mean "A1 or newer.
> 
Thanks for your explaination, I will fix it in the next version.
> Kevin
> 
> .
> 