On 13/03/2024 11:04, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 09:52:56AM -0700, Nikunj Kela wrote:
+Trilok
On 3/4/2024 3:01 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno-scmi.dts
One is with old firmware interface and -scmi is with SCMI. No new top
level compatible change is needed. I understand it was switch from one
interface to the another and not like Qcom platforms which is moving
from in-kernel solution to firmware solution. But the general rule applies
here as well unless there are specific reasons for needing that exception.
I am not against it or ruling that out, just curious to understand them.
Thank you all for all your inputs on this. I discussed this with Srini and
he suggested that we could use a new optional DT property like "qcom,
fw-managed" to ascertain if we are running on firmware managed variant. Thus
each device node in the dts can add this. I did ask him if, instead of
putting it to each device node, we can use it at the board level however he
thinks that it would not be easy to update yaml documentation on DT nodes
with board level property. So if everyone here agrees with this approach, I
would like to close this thread.
The counter argument from me for that is simple. If you are OK to manage with
one board level compatible/property(doesn't matter for this discussion), then
why can't that be the compatible of the firmware itself(SCMI and RPMI both
must have their own compatible already). The main point is why do you need
any extra information when they are already present. My comment is just for
this one board level compatible/property.
Board specific compatible might not scale, as this will bring in changes
to every driver and bindings with new board addition.
BoardLevel property, how are we going to reflect this each device DT
bindings?
Is this new property going to be part of scmi/rpmi firmware node?
--srini
--
Regards,
Sudeep
