[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y39PetDhm9fpycwo@FVFF77S0Q05N>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 11:03:22 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Wang Honghui <honghui.wang@...s.com.cn>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Cristian Maruss <cristian.marussi@....com>,
Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm_scpi: modify to support acpi
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 03:09:31PM +0800, Wang Honghui wrote:
> arm_scpi: modify to support acpi
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Honghui <honghui.wang@...s.com.cn>
> @@ -937,55 +952,116 @@ static int scpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - for (; scpi_drvinfo->num_chans < count; scpi_drvinfo->num_chans++) {
> - resource_size_t size;
> - int idx = scpi_drvinfo->num_chans;
> - struct scpi_chan *pchan = scpi_drvinfo->channels + idx;
> - struct mbox_client *cl = &pchan->cl;
> - struct device_node *shmem = of_parse_phandle(np, "shmem", idx);
> -
> - if (!of_match_node(shmem_of_match, shmem))
> - return -ENXIO;
> + /* Wang Honghui modified to support acpi */
> + if (dev->of_node) {
[...]
> + } else {
> + for (; scpi_info->num_chans < count; scpi_info->num_chans++) {
> + u32 size;
> + u32 addr;
> + int idx = scpi_info->num_chans;
> + struct scpi_chan *pchan = scpi_info->channels + idx;
> + struct mbox_client *cl = &pchan->cl;
> + struct fwnode_handle *fn;
> +
> + fn = dev_fwnode(&(pdev->dev));
> + ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(fn, "shmem_start", &addr);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get SCPI payload mem resource\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(fn, "shmem_size", &size);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to ioremap SCPI payload\n");
> + return -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
> + }
ACPI has native mechanisms to describe IO resources, so this doesn't look right at all.
Does ARM have ACPI bindings for SCPI? I don't think we should be inventing
vendor-specific bindings for this....
> + if (!ret) {
> + pchan->chan = phytium_mbox_request_channel(cl);
... so this looks very wrong.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists