From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752843AbdHKJf6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:35:58 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:42034 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751818AbdHKJfz (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:35:55 -0400 Cc: Sudeep Holla , ALKML , LKML , DTML , Roy Franz , Harb Abdulhamid , Nishanth Menon , Arnd Bergmann , Loc Ho , Alexey Klimov , Ryan Harkin , Jassi Brar , Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/18] dt-bindings: arm: add support for ARM System Control and Management Interface(SCMI) protocol To: Rob Herring References: <1501857104-11279-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1501857104-11279-3-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20170810192838.prslgnjvxv3xvyes@rob-hp-laptop> From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 10:36:13 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170810192838.prslgnjvxv3xvyes@rob-hp-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/08/17 20:28, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 03:31:28PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> This patch adds devicetree binding for System Control and Management >> Interface (SCMI) Message Protocol used between the Application Cores(AP) >> and the System Control Processor(SCP). The MHU peripheral provides a >> mechanism for inter-processor communication between SCP's M3 processor >> and AP. >> >> SCP offers control and management of the core/cluster power states, >> various power domain DVFS including the core/cluster, certain system >> clocks configuration, thermal sensors and many others. >> >> SCMI protocol is developed as better replacement to the existing SCPI >> which is not flexible and easily extensible. >> >> Cc: Rob Herring >> Cc: Mark Rutland >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 174 +++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 174 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..33c16be58e72 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,174 @@ >> +System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Message Protocol >> +---------------------------------------------------------- >> + >> +The SCMI is intended to allow agents such as OSPM to manage various functions >> +that are provided by the hardware platform it is running on, including power >> +and performance functions. >> + >> +This binding is intended to define the interface the firmware implementing >> +the SCMI as described in ARM document number ARM DUI 0922B ("ARM System Control >> +and Management Interface Platform Design Document")[0] provide for OSPM in >> +the device tree. >> + >> +Required properties: > > Please define this is a subnode of /firmware node. > Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of that. Ideally, should we move PSCI and SCPI also under that ? Also should we contain all firmware bindings under Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/ ? [..] >> +PM domain consumers >> +=================== > > How consumers work is already defined elsewhere. > Agreed, will drop it. [..] >> + >> +scmi_protocol: scmi@2e000000 { > > The unit address is not valid. > Ah, copy paste, will drop. Need to fix in scpi bindings too. >> + compatible = "arm,scmi"; >> + method = "mailbox-doorbell"; > > Is this not implied by the mboxes property? > Indeed, remnants from v1. I removed in the definition but left in the example. -- Regards, Sudeep