[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53C65F22.20101@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 12:16:50 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ks.giri@...sung.com" <ks.giri@...sung.com>,
"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
"courtney.cavin@...ymobile.com" <courtney.cavin@...ymobile.com>,
"mporter@...aro.org" <mporter@...aro.org>,
"slapdau@...oo.com.au" <slapdau@...oo.com.au>,
"lftan.linux@...il.com" <lftan.linux@...il.com>,
"loic.pallardy@...com" <loic.pallardy@...com>,
"s-anna@...com" <s-anna@...com>,
"ashwin.chaugule@...aro.org" <ashwin.chaugule@...aro.org>,
"bjorn@...o.se" <bjorn@...o.se>,
"patches@...aro.org" <patches@...aro.org>,
"Mollie.Wu@...fujitsu.com" <Mollie.Wu@...fujitsu.com>,
"t.takinishi@...fujitsu.com" <t.takinishi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv8 2/2] mailbox: Introduce framework for mailbox
On 16/07/14 11:16, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:40:19 Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> +
>>> +Required property:
>>> +- mbox: List of phandle and mailbox channel specifier.
>>> +
>>> +- mbox-names: List of identifier strings for each mailbox channel
>>> + required by the client.
>>> +
>>
>> IMO the mailbox names are more associated with the controller channels/
>> mailbox rather than the clients using it. Does it make sense to move
>> this under controller. It also avoid each client replicating the names.
>
> I think it would be best to just make the mbox-names property optional,
> like we have for other subsystems.
>
OK that makes sense.
> Doing it in the mbox-controller makes no sense at all, because the
> mbox controller has (or should have) no idea what the attached devices are.
>
Agreed if these mbox-names are more specific to attached devices and that
was my initial understanding too. But I got confused when I saw something
like below in the patch[1]
+ mhu: mhu0@...f0000 {
+ #mbox-cells = <1>;
+ compatible = "fujitsu,mhu";
+ reg = <0 0x2B1F0000 0x1000>;
+ interrupts = <0 36 4>, /* LP Non-Sec */
+ <0 35 4>, /* HP Non-Sec */
+ <0 37 4>; /* Secure */
+ };
+
+ mhu_client: scb@0 {
+ compatible = "fujitsu,scb";
+ mbox = <&mhu 1>;
+ mbox-names = "HP_NonSec";
+ };
Here the name used is more controller specific.
Regards,
Sudeep
[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg346991.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists