On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 07:45:06AM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: > On 4/17/2022 11:46 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 03:00:19PM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: > > > From: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > The MHI bus supports a standardized hardware reset, which is known as the > > > "SoC Reset". This reset is similar to the reset sysfs for PCI devices - > > > a hardware mechanism to reset the state back to square one. > > > > > > The MHI SoC Reset is described in the spec as a reset of last resort. If > > > some unrecoverable error has occurred where other resets have failed, SoC > > > Reset is the "big hammer" that ungracefully resets the device. This is > > > effectivly the same as yanking the power on the device, and reapplying it. > > > However, depending on the nature of the particular issue, the underlying > > > transport link may remain active and configured. If the link remains up, > > > the device will flag a MHI system error early in the boot process after > > > the reset is executed, which allows the MHI bus to process a fatal error > > > event, and clean up appropiately. > > > > > > While the SoC Reset is generally intended as a means of recovery when all > > > else has failed, it can be useful in non-error scenarios. For example, > > > if the device loads firmware from the host filesystem, the device may need > > > to be fully rebooted inorder to pick up the new firmware. In this > > > scenario, the system administrator may use the soc_reset sysfs to cause > > > the device to pick up the new firmware that the admin placed on the > > > filesystem. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Do you need double signed-off because of change in domain? > > > > Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> > > That seems to be the convention that I see in the community. As I > understand it, the SoB is linked to the Developers Certificate of Origin. > This version of the change is coming from "quic_jhugo@xxxxxxxxxxx" and that > entity needs to certify they can share the code under the Cert of Origin. > > In theory, I could have avoided this by sending this version under the > codeaurora address. The problem is that the codeaurora domain no longer > exists, so sending/receiving email from that id is not possible. > > If I'm not understanding things correctly, please educate me. IANAL, but since you are the sole developer (and with the same employer) I think it is fine to change the DCO. Moreover, if codeaurora is used, it will get CCed and will bounce. But if you have a strong desire to keep the two tags, please let me know. Thanks, Mani
