[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250702-sceptical-caracal-of-drama-3cbc63@sudeepholla>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 16:22:11 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
<imx@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] firmware: arm_scmi: imx: Support getting silicon
info of MISC protocol
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 02:03:47PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
> MISC protocol supports getting the silicon information including revision
> number, part number and etc. Add the API for user to retrieve the
> information from SM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> ---
> .../firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/scmi_imx_protocol.h | 8 +++++
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> index 8ce4bf92e6535af2f30d72a34717678613b35049..d5b24bc4d4ca6c19f4cddfaea6e9d9b32a4c92f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ enum scmi_imx_misc_protocol_cmd {
> SCMI_IMX_MISC_CTRL_SET = 0x3,
> SCMI_IMX_MISC_CTRL_GET = 0x4,
> SCMI_IMX_MISC_DISCOVER_BUILDINFO = 0x6,
> + SCMI_IMX_MISC_SI_INFO = 0xB,
Again, this seem to have slipped through in my initial review. How is this
different from SMCCC SOC_ID interface. I am OK to have it as part of your
vendor extensions and be here in the kernel documentation. But I won't
accept any users of this within the kernel. Please provide justification
as why you can't use the standard SMCCC SOC_ID.
So, clear NACK for adding this support in the kernel for now.
It is pretty useless to push this to userspace with custom interface.
Use the existing interface with SOC_ID. Also the way I would think this
interface may be used is from SMCCC interface implementation which could
retrieve info via this interface but that would be just platform specific
code in the firmware.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists