Hi Kevin,
On 2019/11/11 22:40, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Hi Kevin,
>>
>> Please see my comments below:
>>
>> On 2019/11/10 4:11, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>> Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> The Amlogic Meson A1/C1 Secure Monitor implements calls to control power
>>>> domain.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jianxin Pan <jianxin.pan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/firmware/meson/meson_sm.c | 2 ++
>>>> include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h | 2 ++
>>>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>
>> [...]
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h b/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h
>>>> index 6669e2a..4ed3989 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/firmware/meson/meson_sm.h
>>>> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ enum {
>>>> SM_EFUSE_WRITE,
>>>> SM_EFUSE_USER_MAX,
>>>> SM_GET_CHIP_ID,
>>>> + SM_PWRC_SET,
>>>> + SM_PWRC_GET,
>>>
>>> These new IDs are unique to the A1/C1 family. Maybe we should add a
>>> prefix to better indicate that. Maybe:
>>>
>>> SM_A1_PWRC_SET,
>>> SM_A1_PWRC_GET,
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> I consulted with the internal VLSI team, and it's likely that the latter new SOC will follow A1/C1.
>> And then it may become common function in the future.
>
> OK, but it's not a common function for the past, so it's useful to mark
> that distinction.
>
> Just like in device-tree, we often have compatibles named for previous
> SoC families (e.g. "gxbb") used on newer SoCs, but we use that to mean
> "GXBB or newer".
>
> Similarily here, we can use SM_A1_ prefix to mean "A1 or newer.
>
Thanks for your explaination, I will fix it in the next version.
> Kevin
>
> .
>
