On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 04:09:01PM +0000, A.s. Dong wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sascha Hauer [mailto:s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 5:41 PM > > To: A.s. Dong <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx> > > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Mark Rutland > > <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>; dongas86@xxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx; will.deacon@xxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; > > dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Fabio Estevam > > <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxx>; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/4] arm64: dts: imx: add imx8qxp support > > > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 09:03:04AM +0000, A.s. Dong wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Sascha Hauer [mailto:s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > > > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 4:28 PM > > > > To: A.s. Dong <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Mark Rutland > > > > <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>; dongas86@xxxxxxxxx; > > > > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx; > > > > will.deacon@xxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx > > > > <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Fabio Estevam > > > > <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxx>; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/4] arm64: dts: imx: add imx8qxp support > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 08:08:31AM +0000, A.s. Dong wrote: > > > > > > > + imx8qx-pm { > > > > > > > + compatible = "fsl,scu-pd"; > > > > > > > > > > > > I missed this earlier, but there should be a i.MX8qp specific > > > > > > compatible as the SCU API might change for future SoCs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We still do not see that requirement up till now. Not sure if it > > > > > would be possible in the future. I see low possibilities. > > > > > SCU IPC is designed to be generic to all MX8 SCU firmwares. > > > > > > > > And i.MX9? i.MX10? > > > > > > > > > > MX8DM MX8DXP > > > > I was not talking about existing SoCs, I was talking about future SoCs. > > > > > > > > > > Even it changes, SCU firmware version control may helps. > > > > > > > > It's not the first time that the position of the version field > > > > changes with a newer version. > > > > > > > > > > I understand your worry. > > > Up till now all SCU firmware based SoCs are all using one generic IPC driver > > internally. > > > And I have not heard a possible changing in the future. > > > I double checked the SCU firmware implementation that the IPC Is > > > deigned to be platform independent. So it's less to be changed. > > > So I wonder if this could be over worried. > > > Even it is changed, (quite less probility), we still can user version > > > To distinguish them, just like arm,scpi , arm,scmi. Right? > > > > You can still add and use a generic compatible, but does it hurt when you add > > a SoC specific one that you *can* use should you have to? > > > > Do you mean only change "fsl,scu-pd" to "fsl,imx8qxp-scu-pd"? > And keep the "fsl,imx-scu" as it is, right? Yes, that's what I meant. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
