> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce > property mbox-rx-timeout-ms > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:17:14AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > > System Controller Management Interface(SCMI) firmwares might > have > > different designs by SCMI firmware developers. So the maximum > receive > > channel timeout value might also varies in the various designs. > > > > So introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms to let each platform could > > set its own timeout value in device tree. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > V2: > > Drop defaults, update description. > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 6 > ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > index ebf384e76df1..dcac0b36c76f 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml > > @@ -121,6 +121,12 @@ properties: > > atomic mode of operation, even if requested. > > default: 0 > > > > + max-rx-timeout-ms: > > + description: > > + An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, representing > the > > + mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The value > should > > + be a non-zero value if set. > > + > > IIRC, you had the min and max constraint in the earlier response. You > need to have rushed and posted another version before I could respond > with my preference. > > So there is no rush, these are v6.12 material. Take time for respining > and give some time for the review. Sure. I just not sure what the maximum should be set, so I drop the minimum and maximum from my previous email. Thanks, Peng. > > -- > Regards, > Sudeep
