| Message ID | 20240709140957.3171255-1-peng.fan@oss.nxp.com |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [V3,1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| robh/checkpatch | success | |
| robh/patch-applied | success | |
| robh/dtbs-check | warning | build log |
| robh/dt-meta-schema | success |
On Tue, 09 Jul 2024 22:09:56 +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > > System Controller Management Interface(SCMI) firmwares might have > different designs by SCMI firmware developers. So the maximum receive > channel timeout value might also varies in the various designs. > > So introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms to let each platform could > set its own timeout value in device tree. > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> > --- > > V3: > Add minimum: 1, because 0 is invalid. maximum is not set, > because it is platform specific and unknown. > V2: > Drop defaults, update description. > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org>
Hi Cristian, > Subject: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > value from device tree The binding has got R-b from Rob, will you pick this patch in your next Patchset? Thanks, Peng.
On 18/07/2024 04:24, Peng Fan wrote: > Hi Cristian, > >> Subject: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout >> value from device tree > > The binding has got R-b from Rob, will you pick this patch in your next > Patchset? Please don't ping during the merge window. Is this a fix? Why shall it be picked up during merge window? Best regards, Krzysztof
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > value from device tree > > On 18/07/2024 04:24, Peng Fan wrote: > > Hi Cristian, > > > >> Subject: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > value > >> from device tree > > > > The binding has got R-b from Rob, will you pick this patch in your > > next Patchset? > > Please don't ping during the merge window. Is this a fix? Why shall it > be picked up during merge window? This is not to ask Sudeep for merge. Cristian is doing a patchset for scmi transport, he said if the binding patch 1 got R-b, he would take patch 2 into his scmi transport patchset to avoid conflict. Regards, Peng. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 02:24:15AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > Hi Cristian, > Hi Peng, > > Subject: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > > value from device tree > > The binding has got R-b from Rob, will you pick this patch in your next > Patchset? > I am going to post a new transport_drivers_V3 and, as a separate series on top of that, your latest "max-rx-timeuout" DT patch as reviewed by Rob, plus the related new logic based on transport_drivers_V3 and a few more similar changes as requested by Nikunj. Thanks, Cristian
Hi Cristian, > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > value from device tree > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 02:24:15AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > Hi Cristian, > > > > Hi Peng, > > > > Subject: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > > > value from device tree > > > > The binding has got R-b from Rob, will you pick this patch in your > > next Patchset? > > > > I am going to post a new transport_drivers_V3 and, as a separate series > on top of that, your latest "max-rx-timeuout" DT patch as reviewed by > Rob, plus the related new logic based on transport_drivers_V3 and a > few more similar changes as requested by Nikunj. Ok, so your V3 not include this patchset. Do you have time to give a look on the 2nd patch? We are still waiting this got R-b to land this in Google GKI kernel. Thanks, Peng. > > Thanks, > Cristian
On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 02:24:17PM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > Hi Cristian, > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > > value from device tree > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 02:24:15AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > > Hi Cristian, > > > > > > > Hi Peng, > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH V3 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: set mailbox timeout > > > > value from device tree > > > > > > The binding has got R-b from Rob, will you pick this patch in your > > > next Patchset? > > > > > > > I am going to post a new transport_drivers_V3 and, as a separate series > > on top of that, your latest "max-rx-timeuout" DT patch as reviewed by > > Rob, plus the related new logic based on transport_drivers_V3 and a > > few more similar changes as requested by Nikunj. > > Ok, so your V3 not include this patchset. Do you have time to give > a look on the 2nd patch? We are still waiting this got R-b to land > this in Google GKI kernel. > As said above, your max-rx-timeout-ms DT patch (with Rob R-b) and more is included in this small series (just posted): https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20240730144707.1647025-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com/T/#t based on top of transport_drivers_V3. Thanks, Cristian
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml index ebf384e76df1..f84a978a36b2 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml @@ -121,6 +121,13 @@ properties: atomic mode of operation, even if requested. default: 0 + max-rx-timeout-ms: + description: + An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, representing the + mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The value should + be a non-zero value if set. + minimum: 1 + arm,smc-id: $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 description: