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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27F07C43331 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:05:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03B220772 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728225AbgDAJFy (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2020 05:05:54 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:46492 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728087AbgDAJFy (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2020 05:05:54 -0400 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 B524131B; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 02:05:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (unknown [10.37.12.97]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D6963F52E; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 02:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 10:05:45 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Peng Fan Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "f.fainelli@gmail.com" , Sudeep Holla , dl-linux-imx Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Check shmem property for channel availablity Message-ID: <20200401090545.GA3954@bogus> References: <20200327163654.13389-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20200327163654.13389-4-sudeep.holla@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 01:15:08AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > Subject: [PATCH 3/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Check shmem property for channel > > availablity > > > > Instead of declaring the channel availabilty unconditionally, let us check for > > the presence of "shmem" property and return the channel availablity > > accordingly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > > --- > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c > > b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c index dd4b54c29679..5929c668dc1d > > 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c > > @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@ struct scmi_smc { > > > > static bool smc_chan_available(struct device *dev, int idx) { > > + struct device_node *np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "shmem", 0); > > + if (!np) > > + return false; > > + > > + of_node_put(np); > > return true; > > } > > This is global shared mem:) > No, the dev pointer is not the parent node here but the child devices unless I am reading it wrong. But yes global for the base protocol :) > Reviewed-by: Peng Fan > Thanks for this and other patches too. -- Regards, Sudeep 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83F5C43331 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:06:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B320E20787 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:06:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="tKblkhOw" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B320E20787 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=fI5FrqX4ryyBsCVlN4yKY2CpScXD1Lp3ufRJ1sHP0Xk=; b=tKblkhOwmQ+X5/ 8Q7a7SoiHj5oVDoMK1tr2mYpsklTfLzPUX11ScIyzutO77c0C0dcZIz9Z4KkOQSfFCLuIRtWj8sMv j/gObBRmhs/XxQjrrheYmVLQT0aiDP480rsY9m0MNu8SC1QlySvuIQKvH4dTxhi3ZiaASfXCb1G5d mCIMnMt6wPIYHbOJgKp/Ow39KZx40uaqN/ZA7EukLNXku3aXBfwvlXIp86S7arx10NNOFmS1eFLWR QxcmCNBvKMp2ztDtOPydSjwKqn1A6NqfE51sntiGB6wtqIZIIGP6ri0L3Hyz+jGyK7+RAGt/ZXWL5 /KGczBGU7pGmuy35plbQ==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jJZJv-0001Xu-KX; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 09:05:59 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jJZJs-0001WI-AR for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 09:05:58 +0000 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 B524131B; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 02:05:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (unknown [10.37.12.97]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D6963F52E; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 02:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 10:05:45 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: Peng Fan Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Check shmem property for channel availablity Message-ID: <20200401090545.GA3954@bogus> References: <20200327163654.13389-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20200327163654.13389-4-sudeep.holla@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200401_020556_411371_58B48852 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 16.12 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "f.fainelli@gmail.com" , dl-linux-imx , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Sudeep Holla Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 01:15:08AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > Subject: [PATCH 3/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Check shmem property for channel > > availablity > > > > Instead of declaring the channel availabilty unconditionally, let us check for > > the presence of "shmem" property and return the channel availablity > > accordingly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > > --- > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c > > b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c index dd4b54c29679..5929c668dc1d > > 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/smc.c > > @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@ struct scmi_smc { > > > > static bool smc_chan_available(struct device *dev, int idx) { > > + struct device_node *np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "shmem", 0); > > + if (!np) > > + return false; > > + > > + of_node_put(np); > > return true; > > } > > This is global shared mem:) > No, the dev pointer is not the parent node here but the child devices unless I am reading it wrong. But yes global for the base protocol :) > Reviewed-by: Peng Fan > Thanks for this and other patches too. -- Regards, Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel