On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:01:25PM +0800, peng.fan@xxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
>
> SCMI could use SMC/HVC as tranports, so add into devicetree
> binding doc.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> index f493d69e6194..03cff8b55a93 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
> @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Required properties:
>
> The scmi node with the following properties shall be under the /firmware/ node.
>
> -- compatible : shall be "arm,scmi"
> +- compatible : shall be "arm,scmi" or "arm,scmi-smc"
> - mboxes: List of phandle and mailbox channel specifiers. It should contain
> exactly one or two mailboxes, one for transmitting messages("tx")
> and another optional for receiving the notifications("rx") if
> @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ The scmi node with the following properties shall be under the /firmware/ node.
> protocol identifier for a given sub-node.
> - #size-cells : should be '0' as 'reg' property doesn't have any size
> associated with it.
> +- arm,smc-id : SMC id required when using smc transports
> +- arm,hvc-id : HVC id required when using hvc transports
Don't the SMC ids get standardized?
>
> Optional properties:
>
> --
> 2.16.4
>
