Hi Krzysztof, On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 10:27:10AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 22/02/2022 09:55, Oleksii Moisieiev wrote: > > > >> > >> 2. Does your example work properly? Passes dt_binding_check? Reg looks > >> different than unit-address. > >> > > dt_bindings_check passes without errors. Also I've checked this file > > explicitly by using command: > > yamllint -c Documentation/devicetree/bindings/.yamllint Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi-devid.yaml > > > > Reg value, if you mean reg parameter from an Example, was taken from > > r8a77961.dtsi file. > The check does not pass. You have an error there: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi-devid.example.dt.yaml: > example-0: usb@ee0a0000:reg:0: [0, 3993632768, 0, 256] is too long > > Probably I've missed that. I'll doublecheck. > > > > >> > >>> > >>>> 2. Your schema does is not selected by anything. How is it intended to > >>>> be used? Nothing is including it, either... > >>>> > >>> > >>> The idea is to use this parameter to set the device_id for the device in > >>> the device-tree, which matches to the device mapping in the Firmware, so > >>> Trusted Agent can use it to the device permissions. > >>> Please see Sections 4.2.2.10 and 4.2.1 [0] (Link was provided in the > >>> cover letter). > >>> > >>> I'm currently propose the new feature, called SCI mediator to Xen-devel > >>> community. Please see link [1] from cover letter for the details. > >>> In this feature - Xen is the Trusted Agent, which uses scmi_devid > >>> parameter to set the device permissions. > >>> We think that this parameter will be useful for other possible SCMI > >>> implementations, such as other hypervisor or SCMI backend server etc. > >> > >> We talk about different things, I think. I was asking how is this schema > >> selected? > >> > >> I gave it a fast try (dtbs_check) and it confirmed - schema does not > >> have an effect. It's a noop. You need something like "select: true", see: > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem-consumer.yaml > >> or this schema should be included by other schemas... but then I would > >> be happy to see actual usage in this patchset (more commits...). > >> > > > > I think select: true will work for me. I'll do dtbs_check and > > dt_bindings_check after making all changes and prepare v2 if there will > > be no further comments. > > > > Also what do you think about maintainers: field? Is it correct? I'm not > > sure if I used it correctly. > > > I think you should add arm,scmi maintainer next to you. > Should I update MAINTAINERS file as well? Best regards, Oleksii.
