Messages in this thread | | | From | Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 13/15] mailbox: mediatek: Add mt8188 support for CMDQ secure driver | Date | Mon, 25 Sep 2023 06:01:22 +0000 |
| |
Hi Krzysztof,
On Sat, 2023-09-23 at 20:09 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until > you have verified the sender or the content. > On 18/09/2023 21:22, Jason-JH.Lin wrote: > > Add mt8188 support for CMDQ secure driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@mediatek.com> > > --- > > drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c > b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c > > index 3940b9f8e774..4e047dc916b9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c > > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c > > @@ -750,6 +750,7 @@ static const struct gce_plat gce_plat_v8 = { > > .thread_nr = 32, > > .shift = 3, > > .control_by_sw = true, > > +.has_sec = true, > > No, you just added it patch ago. Do not add broken code and fix it. > Are > there some KPIs in Mediatek to have patch count? >
This patch is different from [PATCH 14/15] at the gce_plat: [PATCH 13/15] is adding the flag to gce_plat_v8 for mediatek,mt8188-gce [PATCH 14/15] is adding the flag to gce_plat_v6 for mediatek,mt8195-gce
I'm sorry about that gce_plat are too similar to cause the confusion.
I'vd built the whole series before sending it, so I think it won't break the code and I think there are no KPIs on the patch count.
Should I merge [PATCH 13/15] and [PATCH 14/15] in to [PATCH 9/15] to show how it works?
Regards, Jason-JH.Lin
> Best regards, > Krzysztof > >
| |