[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7335064d-60ee-4045-a119-082daf89464f@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 12:11:12 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Jinlong Mao <quic_jinlmao@...cinc.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Mike Leach
<mike.leach@...aro.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: coresight@...ts.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] dt-bindings: arm: Add CoreSight QMI component
description
On 7/10/25 1:03 PM, Jinlong Mao wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/4/25 4:30, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 4/24/25 1:58 PM, Mao Jinlong wrote:
>>> Add new coresight-qmi.yaml file describing the bindings required
>>> to define qmi node in the device trees.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong <quic_jinlmao@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> Is the service-id hardcoded/well-known? If so, we can drop
>> this devicetree node and create a new platform device (& probe the
>> related driver) based on the presence of qcom,qmi-id that you add
>> in patch 3
>>
>> Konrad
>
> service-id is not hardcoded. Different qmi connections will have
> different service ids.
FWIW the OSS qrtr-lookup utility only lists the one you included in
the example.. I'm not saying this list is exhaustive, but I'd like
you to provide a counter-example.
https://github.com/linux-msm/qrtr/blob/master/src/lookup.c#L71
Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists