On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 01:43:48PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > so now that the catch-all protocol@ patternProperty is gone in favour > of the 'protocol-node' definition and $refs, does that mean that any > current and future SCMI officially published protocol <N> has to be > added to the above explicit protocol list, even though it does not > have any special additional required property beside reg ? > (like protocol@18 above...) > If there are no consumers, should we just not add and deal with it entirely within the kernel. I know we rely today on presence of node before we initialise, but hey we have exception for system power protocol for other reasons, why not add this one too. In short we shouldn't have to add a node if there are no consumers. It was one of the topic of discussion initially when SCMI binding was added and they exist only for the consumers otherwise we don't need it as everything is discoverable from the interface. -- Regards, Sudeep
