On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 08:49:47PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote: > The Messaging Unit module enables two processors within > the SoC to communicate and coordinate by passing messages > (e.g. data, status and control) through the MU interface. > > Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Sascha Hauer <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx> > --- > v1->v2: > * typo fixes > * remove status property > * remove imx6&7 compatible string which may be added later for > the generic mailbox binding > > Note: Because MU used by SCU is not implemented as a mailbox driver, > Instead, they're provided in library calls to gain higher performance. Using a binding doesn't mean you have to use an OS's subsystem. What needs higher performance? What's the performance difference? Why can't the mailbox framework be improved? > Futhermore, SCU MU has only one channel. But the binding doc claims > (Change to allow 0?) > So we did not follow the mailbox binding. > > For the generic mailbox driver binding way, it may be added later. The h/w isn't changing later, so no. > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,mu.txt | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,mu.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
