Hi Krzysztof, On Thu, 2022-06-02 at 14:26 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 02/06/2022 13:53, Tinghan Shen wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > On Thu, 2022-06-02 at 12:45 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 02/06/2022 12:19, Tinghan Shen wrote: > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2022-06-02 at 09:40 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > On 02/06/2022 08:44, Tinghan Shen wrote: > > > > > > > > + mbox-names: > > > > > > > > + items: > > > > > > > > + - const: mbox0 > > > > > > > > + - const: mbox1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > These should be rather some meaningful names, e.g. "rx" and "tx". > > > > > > > > > > > > The mbox name has to align with the adsp ipc driver. > > > > > > The adsp ipc driver is using 'mbox%d' for mailbox channels. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git/commit/?id=9db69df4bdd37eb1f65b6931ee067fb15b9a4d5c__;!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!1TmempNkQhC5QuLBhyfWo_AC97MoLuWipsGV-LPaW9RKNPheU7Bgc-eboNi1JA1nC5I$ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > chan_name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "mbox%d", i); > > > > > > > > > > > > /* ...snip... */ > > > > > > > > > > > > adsp_chan->ch = mbox_request_channel_byname(cl, chan_name); > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it ok to continue using these names? > > > > > > > > > > It is a bit confusing... how did that driver got merged recently without > > > > > bindings? Why bindings are separate? > > > > > > > > > > The bindings always come together in one patchset with the driver > > > > > implementing them. Bindings are though a separate patch, yet still > > > > > followed by the driver which uses them. > > > > > > > > > > I do not see any compatibles in that driver, which suggests there is no > > > > > other binding using it. If that's correct, then you need to change the > > > > > driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mtk-adsp-ipc driver's sole function is to encapsulate the operations > > > > of mailbox framework from adsp ipc users. The mtk-adsp-ipc is not defined > > > > in the dts file and we don't need it to be defined. The creation of mtk-adsp-ipc > > > > device is requested by adsp ipc users via the use of 'platform_device_register_data'[1]. > > > > > > > > the driver implemented the mailbox framework is 'mtk-adsp-mailbox'[2]. it has > > > > corresponding hardwares and a yaml file[3] to describe it. > > > > > > I don't understand how is this related. We talk here about the > > > mbox-names for this bindings file. You replied, that these bindings are > > > already used by something, but now you say that they are not? So why do > > > you need to change anything in any driver? > > > > > > Simple question - do the bindings here "add mt8186 dsp document" are > > > used by any specific Linux driver already? > > > > This bindings, 'add mt8186 dsp document', are used by the SOF sound driver of MT8186[1]. > > > > I'm sorry for miss leading you in previous reply. I was thought that you're > > asking why the mtk-adsp-ipc driver got merged without bindings. So, I tried > > to explain why mtk-adsp-ipc doesn't have bindings. > > Then my question is kind of still valid: > How did "mt8186 SOF" driver got merged recently without bindings? Why > bindings are separate? > > You cannot just sneak in usage of bindings in a driver, then submit > bindings and say "we already have an user!". No, the bindings come with > the driver. Always. > > Linked patch [1] brings undocumented compatible mediatek,mt8186-dsp, so > you should see big fat warning when running checkpatch. So this points > that you did not run checkpatch which is another not acceptable > submission. :( > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220422055659.8738-2-tinghan.shen@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ > I apologize for breaking the rules and sending inappropriate patches. I was thought that it was acceptable to send community reviewed patches in a series, then followed the bindings at another patch. I was believed that separating un-reviewed binding patch from reviewed driver patches would aid in patch acceptance. Now, I see I make a big mistake. I'm sorry. Best regards, TingHan
