From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
peng.fan@nxp.com, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of transport type
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 11:15:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3wnn3E9DEfAoXNAurZ3Yop-Y3d_9+3mARY2v5y2B5dAw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200109093442.4jt44eu2zlmjaq3f@vireshk-i7>
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:34 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 09-01-20, 09:18, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 10:32 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > This looks odd: rather than guessing the transport type based on
> > random DT properties, I would prefer to have it determined by
> > the device compatible string, and have different drivers bind
> > to one of them each, with each driver linking against a common
> > base implementation, either as separate modules or in one file.
>
> Since there are no platforms using the scmi binding in mainline kernel
> for now, it won't be difficult to add new compatible strings. So
> should this be done like:
>
> compatible = "arm,scmi", "arm,scmi-mailbox";
>
> or just
> compatible = "arm,scmi-mailbox";
I would keep compatibility with the existing binding and make a plain "arm,scmi"
mean the version with the mailbox, while for new transports, I would
require them to have both the existing compatible string and a more specific
one.
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: peng.fan@nxp.com, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of transport type
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 11:15:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3wnn3E9DEfAoXNAurZ3Yop-Y3d_9+3mARY2v5y2B5dAw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200109093442.4jt44eu2zlmjaq3f@vireshk-i7>
On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:34 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 09-01-20, 09:18, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 10:32 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > This looks odd: rather than guessing the transport type based on
> > random DT properties, I would prefer to have it determined by
> > the device compatible string, and have different drivers bind
> > to one of them each, with each driver linking against a common
> > base implementation, either as separate modules or in one file.
>
> Since there are no platforms using the scmi binding in mainline kernel
> for now, it won't be difficult to add new compatible strings. So
> should this be done like:
>
> compatible = "arm,scmi", "arm,scmi-mailbox";
>
> or just
> compatible = "arm,scmi-mailbox";
I would keep compatibility with the existing binding and make a plain "arm,scmi"
mean the version with the mailbox, while for new transports, I would
require them to have both the existing compatible string and a more specific
one.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-09 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-29 9:31 [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of transport type Viresh Kumar
2019-11-29 9:31 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-03 12:00 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-12-03 12:00 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-12-10 10:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-10 10:18 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-09 18:13 ` Cristian Marussi
2019-12-09 18:13 ` Cristian Marussi
2019-12-10 5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-10 5:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-10 18:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-12-10 18:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-12-11 2:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-11 2:43 ` Viresh Kumar
2019-12-31 2:50 ` Peng Fan
2019-12-31 2:50 ` Peng Fan
2019-12-31 12:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-12-31 12:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-12-31 20:09 ` Jassi Brar
2019-12-31 20:09 ` Jassi Brar
2020-01-06 11:00 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-06 11:00 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-09 8:18 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-01-09 8:18 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-01-09 9:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-01-09 9:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-01-10 12:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-10 12:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-09 9:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-01-09 9:34 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-01-09 10:15 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2020-01-09 10:15 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-01-10 12:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-10 12:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-13 6:45 ` Peng Fan
2020-01-13 6:45 ` Peng Fan
2020-01-10 12:31 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-01-10 12:31 ` Sudeep Holla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAK8P3a3wnn3E9DEfAoXNAurZ3Yop-Y3d_9+3mARY2v5y2B5dAw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=jassisinghbrar@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peng.fan@nxp.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.