Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:29:56 +0100 | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv8 2/2] mailbox: Introduce framework for mailbox |
| |
On 16/07/14 12:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 16 July 2014 12:16:50 Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> Agreed if these mbox-names are more specific to attached devices and that >> was my initial understanding too. But I got confused when I saw something >> like below in the patch[1] >> >> + mhu: mhu0@2b1f0000 { >> + #mbox-cells = <1>; >> + compatible = "fujitsu,mhu"; >> + reg = <0 0x2B1F0000 0x1000>; >> + interrupts = <0 36 4>, /* LP Non-Sec */ >> + <0 35 4>, /* HP Non-Sec */ >> + <0 37 4>; /* Secure */ >> + }; >> + >> + mhu_client: scb@0 { >> + compatible = "fujitsu,scb"; >> + mbox = <&mhu 1>; >> + mbox-names = "HP_NonSec"; >> + }; >> >> Here the name used is more controller specific. > > The name is definitely specific to the client, not the master. The
IIUC this controller has 3 channels: Secure, High and Low Priority Non Secure. I assumed the name is derived from that rather than what the client is using it for, hence the confusion. That might be fine but I am more interested what will be the name if another client uses the same channel in the above example.
Regards, Sudeep
> string "HP_NonSec" should be required in the binding for the "fujitsu,scb" > device here, and the scb driver should pass that hardcoded string > to the mailbox API to ask for a channel. > > Arnd > >
| |