[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AM0PR04MB4481A6C089DD233D4099566D881C0@AM0PR04MB4481.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 02:08:06 +0000
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
CC: "viresh.kumar@...aro.org" <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] firmware: arm_scmi: mailbox: share shmem for
protocols
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] firmware: arm_scmi: mailbox: share shmem for
> protocols
>
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 08:57:25PM +0800, peng.fan@....com wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> >
> > When shmem property of protocol is not specificed, let it use its
> > parent's shmem property.
> >
>
+arm list
> Why do you even need this ? If shmem property of protocol is not specified
> then why is the mailbox property ? Either you need both or none. I don't see
> the point of this patch. I am interested to know how are you even hitting this
> case.
Without this patch, I need add shmem property in each protocol node.
With this patch, I only need to add shmem property in scmi node.
In mailbox_chan_setup, cdev is protocol device, input parameter device
is the parent, saying scmi device.
>
> If you don't have mailbox property, then chan_available is false and hence we
> don't call chan_setup.
chan_avilable only parse mbox properties, not shmem.
Regards,
Peng.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists