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=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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 99173C433DB for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:04:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50CBE64E6B for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:04:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229540AbhCOJEH (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2021 05:04:07 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:53910 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229524AbhCOJDz (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Mar 2021 05:03:55 -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 5A5961FB; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 02:03:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e120937-lin (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72B4E3F70D; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 02:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:03:43 +0000 From: Cristian Marussi To: Sudeep Holla Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, etienne.carriere@linaro.org, thara.gopinath@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, souvik.chakravarty@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 37/37] firmware: arm_scmi: add dynamic scmi devices creation Message-ID: <20210315090343.GH30179@e120937-lin> References: <20210202221555.41167-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20210202221555.41167-38-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20210315083327.p6gculrdl3vlavhp@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210315083327.p6gculrdl3vlavhp@bogus> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 08:33:27AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Cristian, > > Sorry for the delay. > No worries. > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:15:55PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > Having added the support for SCMI protocols as modules in order to let > > vendors extend the SCMI core with their own additions it seems odd to > > then force SCMI drivers built on top to use a static device table to > > declare their devices since this way any new SCMI drivers addition > > would need the core SCMI device table to be updated too. > > > > Remove the static core device table and let SCMI drivers to simply declare > > which device/protocol pair they need at initialization time: the core will > > then take care to generate such devices dynamically during platform > > initialization or at module loading time, as long as the requested > > underlying protocol is defined in the DT. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi > > --- > > v4 --> v5 > > - using klist instead of custom lists > > v3 --> v4 > > - add a few comments > > --- > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c | 30 +++ > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 5 + > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 309 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 3 files changed, 310 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > > index 88e5057f4e85..88149a46e6d9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > > @@ -51,6 +51,31 @@ static int scmi_dev_match(struct device *dev, struct device_driver *drv) > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static int scmi_match_by_id_table(struct device *dev, void *data) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_device *sdev = to_scmi_dev(dev); > > + struct scmi_device_id *id_table = data; > > + > > + return sdev->protocol_id == id_table->protocol_id && > > + !strcmp(sdev->name, id_table->name); > > +} > > + > > +struct scmi_device *scmi_find_child_dev(struct device *parent, > > + int prot_id, const char *name) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_device_id id_table; > > + struct device *dev; > > + > > + id_table.protocol_id = prot_id; > > + id_table.name = name; > > + > > + dev = device_find_child(parent, &id_table, scmi_match_by_id_table); > > + if (!dev) > > + return NULL; > > + > > + return to_scmi_dev(dev); > > +} > > + > > const struct scmi_protocol *scmi_get_protocol(int protocol_id) > > { > > const struct scmi_protocol *proto; > > @@ -114,6 +139,10 @@ int scmi_driver_register(struct scmi_driver *driver, struct module *owner, > > { > > int retval; > > > > + retval = scmi_request_protocol_device(driver->id_table); > > + if (retval) > > + return retval; > > + > > driver->driver.bus = &scmi_bus_type; > > driver->driver.name = driver->name; > > driver->driver.owner = owner; > > @@ -130,6 +159,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scmi_driver_register); > > void scmi_driver_unregister(struct scmi_driver *driver) > > { > > driver_unregister(&driver->driver); > > + scmi_unrequest_protocol_device(driver->id_table); > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scmi_driver_unregister); > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > index 1e2046c61d43..9a0519db4865 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > @@ -307,6 +307,11 @@ struct scmi_transport_ops { > > bool (*poll_done)(struct scmi_chan_info *cinfo, struct scmi_xfer *xfer); > > }; > > > > +int scmi_request_protocol_device(const struct scmi_device_id *id_table); > > +void scmi_unrequest_protocol_device(const struct scmi_device_id *id_table); > > Sorry for being pedantic, I don't like these names. I would prefer > something like scmi_protocol_device_{create,destroy/delete}_request. > The action the function does needs to be at the end of the function name. > Atleast that is something I follow. I haven't checked all the previous > patches, just this function made to look at both the name style and the > name itself. > Ok. > > > +struct scmi_device *scmi_find_child_dev(struct device *parent, > > + int prot_id, const char *name); > > + > > scmi_child_dev_find based on what I mentioned above. Please change all > other non-static functions even if I have not mentioned. Try to cover > all the new functions introduced in this series, existing ones we can > take up later. > Ok I'll do. > > /** > > * struct scmi_desc - Description of SoC integration > > * > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c > > index dcdfd94b47f7..9fc979e3b16f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c > > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > #include > > #include > > #include > > @@ -56,6 +57,14 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(scmi_list_mutex); > > /* Track the unique id for the transfers for debug & profiling purpose */ > > static atomic_t transfer_last_id; > > > > +static DEFINE_IDR(scmi_requested_devices); > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(scmi_requested_devices_mtx); > > + > > +struct scmi_requested_dev { > > + const struct scmi_device_id *id_table; > > + struct list_head node; > > +}; > > + > > /** > > * struct scmi_xfers_info - Structure to manage transfer information > > * > > @@ -113,6 +122,8 @@ struct scmi_protocol_instance { > > * @protocols_mtx: A mutex to protect protocols instances initialization. > > * @protocols_imp: List of protocols implemented, currently maximum of > > * MAX_PROTOCOLS_IMP elements allocated by the base protocol > > + * @active_protocols: IDR storing device_nodes for protocols actually defined > > + * in the DT and confirmed as implemented by fw. > > * @notify_priv: Pointer to private data structure specific to notifications. > > * @node: List head > > * @users: Number of users of this instance > > @@ -130,6 +141,7 @@ struct scmi_info { > > /* Ensure mutual exclusive access to protocols instance array */ > > struct mutex protocols_mtx; > > u8 *protocols_imp; > > + struct idr active_protocols; > > void *notify_priv; > > struct list_head node; > > int users; > > @@ -936,6 +948,13 @@ static void scmi_devm_put_protocol(struct scmi_device *sdev, u8 protocol_id) > > WARN_ON(ret); > > } > > > > +static inline > > +struct scmi_handle *scmi_handle_get_from_info(struct scmi_info *info) > > +{ > > + info->users++; > > Doesn't it race with anything ? I have already forgotten how this is used > and in what context this gets called. > > > + return &info->handle; > > +} > > + > > /** > > * scmi_handle_get() - Get the SCMI handle for a device > > * > > @@ -957,8 +976,7 @@ struct scmi_handle *scmi_handle_get(struct device *dev) > > list_for_each(p, &scmi_list) { > > info = list_entry(p, struct scmi_info, node); > > if (dev->parent == info->dev) { > > - handle = &info->handle; > > - info->users++; > > + handle = scmi_handle_get_from_info(info); > > Ah here it is. Any particular reasons for moving it to separate function ? > Answering both of the above, users++ is protected by scmi_list_mutex as it was already and the reason for moving the get in a separate function is to able to call it with mutex alrady acquired, so both here from scmi_handle_get(), which acquires itself that mutex, BUT also from scmi_request_protocol_device() which acquires already the mutex while scanning the list of all the existing scmi instances; it is a sort of get_handle_unlocked but since I changed also the param from dev to info (since I have it already) I named it get_from_info instead. I could add a get_from_info_unlocked(0 to clarify the intent. I'll rework all of the above and post the whole series on top of for-next-scmi + Jonathan immutable branch locally merged. Thanks Cristian > -- > 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=-15.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 550F8C433E0 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:07:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (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 BD89264EB6 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:07:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD89264EB6 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+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=desiato.20200630; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc: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=R/AMppLIIoswjo6wvSKGxqcLHA7VlAul1YA6qR7bduA=; b=Av/Or6OaSZLoasmwTvQljfBB5 zdNcamyVA5LgM1Kkey0oOT3163RuJvzJdcPlljy12Qsu8UGi0vD80OlVtalgaNyAzdbb5bXamOOGA /HsyH0mHbGQwgXgSttG9SfFEqz8E4Bywn+seVkKnfwU8R2cfSYyxGpJhXMhr9ScBJLIJ/V+pjqXCD P29uBW2JNzcz/P1hUR9g+Tvi0plg/H6mYHMaWRq2PtiVmgKBvrK+dL4IBXLFbmCQCW+UWdMHQJ6Qs cdj91WehJ3pT/9UpS56FbNf684srU+wTmDD14Rn6Q5AgG11Bo6mg+agq/2PrwgoincNf7AkV4N0Ot 5p60VJ3/A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=desiato.infradead.org) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lLjA1-00FL4q-SP; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:05:16 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lLj8n-00FKvF-Vu for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:04:03 +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 5A5961FB; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 02:03:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e120937-lin (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72B4E3F70D; Mon, 15 Mar 2021 02:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:03:43 +0000 From: Cristian Marussi To: Sudeep Holla Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lukasz.luba@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, etienne.carriere@linaro.org, thara.gopinath@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, souvik.chakravarty@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 37/37] firmware: arm_scmi: add dynamic scmi devices creation Message-ID: <20210315090343.GH30179@e120937-lin> References: <20210202221555.41167-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20210202221555.41167-38-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20210315083327.p6gculrdl3vlavhp@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210315083327.p6gculrdl3vlavhp@bogus> 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-20210315_090359_219730_7074EDC1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 45.93 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 08:33:27AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Hi Cristian, > > Sorry for the delay. > No worries. > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 10:15:55PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > Having added the support for SCMI protocols as modules in order to let > > vendors extend the SCMI core with their own additions it seems odd to > > then force SCMI drivers built on top to use a static device table to > > declare their devices since this way any new SCMI drivers addition > > would need the core SCMI device table to be updated too. > > > > Remove the static core device table and let SCMI drivers to simply declare > > which device/protocol pair they need at initialization time: the core will > > then take care to generate such devices dynamically during platform > > initialization or at module loading time, as long as the requested > > underlying protocol is defined in the DT. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi > > --- > > v4 --> v5 > > - using klist instead of custom lists > > v3 --> v4 > > - add a few comments > > --- > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c | 30 +++ > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 5 + > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 309 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 3 files changed, 310 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > > index 88e5057f4e85..88149a46e6d9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > > @@ -51,6 +51,31 @@ static int scmi_dev_match(struct device *dev, struct device_driver *drv) > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static int scmi_match_by_id_table(struct device *dev, void *data) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_device *sdev = to_scmi_dev(dev); > > + struct scmi_device_id *id_table = data; > > + > > + return sdev->protocol_id == id_table->protocol_id && > > + !strcmp(sdev->name, id_table->name); > > +} > > + > > +struct scmi_device *scmi_find_child_dev(struct device *parent, > > + int prot_id, const char *name) > > +{ > > + struct scmi_device_id id_table; > > + struct device *dev; > > + > > + id_table.protocol_id = prot_id; > > + id_table.name = name; > > + > > + dev = device_find_child(parent, &id_table, scmi_match_by_id_table); > > + if (!dev) > > + return NULL; > > + > > + return to_scmi_dev(dev); > > +} > > + > > const struct scmi_protocol *scmi_get_protocol(int protocol_id) > > { > > const struct scmi_protocol *proto; > > @@ -114,6 +139,10 @@ int scmi_driver_register(struct scmi_driver *driver, struct module *owner, > > { > > int retval; > > > > + retval = scmi_request_protocol_device(driver->id_table); > > + if (retval) > > + return retval; > > + > > driver->driver.bus = &scmi_bus_type; > > driver->driver.name = driver->name; > > driver->driver.owner = owner; > > @@ -130,6 +159,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scmi_driver_register); > > void scmi_driver_unregister(struct scmi_driver *driver) > > { > > driver_unregister(&driver->driver); > > + scmi_unrequest_protocol_device(driver->id_table); > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(scmi_driver_unregister); > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > index 1e2046c61d43..9a0519db4865 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > @@ -307,6 +307,11 @@ struct scmi_transport_ops { > > bool (*poll_done)(struct scmi_chan_info *cinfo, struct scmi_xfer *xfer); > > }; > > > > +int scmi_request_protocol_device(const struct scmi_device_id *id_table); > > +void scmi_unrequest_protocol_device(const struct scmi_device_id *id_table); > > Sorry for being pedantic, I don't like these names. I would prefer > something like scmi_protocol_device_{create,destroy/delete}_request. > The action the function does needs to be at the end of the function name. > Atleast that is something I follow. I haven't checked all the previous > patches, just this function made to look at both the name style and the > name itself. > Ok. > > > +struct scmi_device *scmi_find_child_dev(struct device *parent, > > + int prot_id, const char *name); > > + > > scmi_child_dev_find based on what I mentioned above. Please change all > other non-static functions even if I have not mentioned. Try to cover > all the new functions introduced in this series, existing ones we can > take up later. > Ok I'll do. > > /** > > * struct scmi_desc - Description of SoC integration > > * > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c > > index dcdfd94b47f7..9fc979e3b16f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c > > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > #include > > #include > > #include > > @@ -56,6 +57,14 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(scmi_list_mutex); > > /* Track the unique id for the transfers for debug & profiling purpose */ > > static atomic_t transfer_last_id; > > > > +static DEFINE_IDR(scmi_requested_devices); > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(scmi_requested_devices_mtx); > > + > > +struct scmi_requested_dev { > > + const struct scmi_device_id *id_table; > > + struct list_head node; > > +}; > > + > > /** > > * struct scmi_xfers_info - Structure to manage transfer information > > * > > @@ -113,6 +122,8 @@ struct scmi_protocol_instance { > > * @protocols_mtx: A mutex to protect protocols instances initialization. > > * @protocols_imp: List of protocols implemented, currently maximum of > > * MAX_PROTOCOLS_IMP elements allocated by the base protocol > > + * @active_protocols: IDR storing device_nodes for protocols actually defined > > + * in the DT and confirmed as implemented by fw. > > * @notify_priv: Pointer to private data structure specific to notifications. > > * @node: List head > > * @users: Number of users of this instance > > @@ -130,6 +141,7 @@ struct scmi_info { > > /* Ensure mutual exclusive access to protocols instance array */ > > struct mutex protocols_mtx; > > u8 *protocols_imp; > > + struct idr active_protocols; > > void *notify_priv; > > struct list_head node; > > int users; > > @@ -936,6 +948,13 @@ static void scmi_devm_put_protocol(struct scmi_device *sdev, u8 protocol_id) > > WARN_ON(ret); > > } > > > > +static inline > > +struct scmi_handle *scmi_handle_get_from_info(struct scmi_info *info) > > +{ > > + info->users++; > > Doesn't it race with anything ? I have already forgotten how this is used > and in what context this gets called. > > > + return &info->handle; > > +} > > + > > /** > > * scmi_handle_get() - Get the SCMI handle for a device > > * > > @@ -957,8 +976,7 @@ struct scmi_handle *scmi_handle_get(struct device *dev) > > list_for_each(p, &scmi_list) { > > info = list_entry(p, struct scmi_info, node); > > if (dev->parent == info->dev) { > > - handle = &info->handle; > > - info->users++; > > + handle = scmi_handle_get_from_info(info); > > Ah here it is. Any particular reasons for moving it to separate function ? > Answering both of the above, users++ is protected by scmi_list_mutex as it was already and the reason for moving the get in a separate function is to able to call it with mutex alrady acquired, so both here from scmi_handle_get(), which acquires itself that mutex, BUT also from scmi_request_protocol_device() which acquires already the mutex while scanning the list of all the existing scmi instances; it is a sort of get_handle_unlocked but since I changed also the param from dev to info (since I have it already) I named it get_from_info instead. I could add a get_from_info_unlocked(0 to clarify the intent. I'll rework all of the above and post the whole series on top of for-next-scmi + Jonathan immutable branch locally merged. Thanks Cristian > -- > Regards, > Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel