On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 05:18:01PM -0600, Hari Nagalla wrote: > On 3/8/23 14:58, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > > +required: > > > + - compatible > > > + - reg > > > + - reg-names > > > + - ti,sci > > > + - ti,sci-dev-id > > > + - ti,sci-proc-ids > > > + - resets > > > + - firmware-name > > > + - mboxes > > The 'mboxes' property is marked as required but the description section above > > clearly state the M4F can operate without IPC. > > > Well, when the M4F is used as a safety processor it is typically booted from > SBL/u-boot and may isolate the MCU domain from main domain/A53 to function > in higher safety level. In these scenarios there is no remote proc handling > of M4F life cycle management (LCM) and IPC. But, on the other hand, when the > M4F is used as a non safety processor its LCM is handled by remote proc(main > domain) and mailboxes for IPC are required. Well, what you wrote above is pretty much explained verbatim in the "description" section of the bindings. Mailboxes are optional and as such should not be found under the "required" section.
