On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 4:14 AM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 02:18:52PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > > Add device tree bindings for the RISC-V SBI Message Proxy (MPXY) > > extension as a mailbox controller. > > > > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../bindings/mailbox/riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox.yaml | 54 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox.yaml > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox.yaml > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..8a05e089b710 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox.yaml > > @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) > > +%YAML 1.2 > > +--- > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mailbox/riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox.yaml# > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > + > > +title: RISC-V SBI Message Proxy (MPXY) extension based mailbox > > + > > +maintainers: > > + - Anup Patel <anup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > + > > +description: | > > + The RISC-V SBI Message Proxy (MPXY) extension [1] allows supervisor > > + software to send messages through the SBI implementation (M-mode > > + firmware or HS-mode hypervisor). The underlying message protocol > > + and message format used by the supervisor software could be some > > + other standard protocol compatible with the SBI MPXY extension > > + (such as RISC-V Platform Management Interface (RPMI) [2]). > > + > > + =========================================== > > + References > > + =========================================== > > + > > + [1] RISC-V Supervisor Binary Interface (SBI) > > + https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-sbi-doc/releases > > + > > + [2] RISC-V Platform Management Interface (RPMI) > > + https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-rpmi/releases > > + > > +properties: > > + $nodename: > > + const: sbi-mpxy-mbox > > 'mailbox' is the defined name for mailbox providers. Okay, I will update. > > > + > > + compatible: > > + const: riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox > > + > > + "#mbox-cells": > > + const: 2 > > + description: > > + The first cell specifies channel_id of the SBI MPXY channel, > > + the second cell specifies MSG_PROT_ID of the SBI MPXY channel > > + > > +required: > > + - compatible > > + - "#mbox-cells" > > + > > +additionalProperties: false > > + > > +examples: > > + - | > > + sbi-mpxy-mbox { > > + compatible = "riscv,sbi-mpxy-mbox"; > > + #mbox-cells = <2>; > > Is there an SBI node? #mbox-cells could just be part of that along with > anything else that SBI is a provider for. And we already have the PMU > SBI binding. It's all one thing, so there should be one SBI node. Then > we can debate about child nodes of it. There is no SBI node for any other SBI extension. The PMU bindings for "riscv,pmu" compatible string is for the firmware driver (M-mode) which implements the SBI PMU extension not the Linux driver. The "title" and "description" of <linux_source>/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/riscv,pmu.yaml needs some clarification. Regards, Anup
