Re: [PATCH 01/10] Documentation: dt-bindings: mailbox: tegra: Add binding for HSP mailbox

[Joseph Lo]

On 06/29/2016 03:08 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/28/2016 03:15 AM, Joseph Lo wrote:
> > On 06/27/2016 11:55 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > > On 06/27/2016 03:02 AM, Joseph Lo wrote:
snip.
> > Currently the usage of HSP HW in the downstream kernel is something like
> > the model below.
> >
> > remote_processor_A-\
> > remote_processor_B--->hsp@1000 (doorbell func) <-> host CPU
> > remote_processor_C-/
> >
> > remote_processor_D -> hsp@2000 (shared mailbox) <-> CPU
> >
> > remote_processor_E -> hsp@3000 (shared mailbox) <-> CPU
> >
> > I am thinking if we can just add the appropriate compatible strings for
> > it to replace "nvidia,tegra186-hsp". e.g. "nvidia,tegra186-hsp-doorbell"
> > and "nvidia,tegra186-hsp-sharedmailbox". So the driver can probe and
> > initialize correctly depend on the compatible property. How do you think
> > about it? Is this the same as the (b) you mentioned above?
>
> Yes, that would be (b) above.
>
> However, please do note (a): I expect that splitting things up will turn
> out to be a mistake, as it has for other HW modules in the past. I would
> far rather see a single hsp node in DT, since there is a single HSP
> block in HW. Sure that block has multiple sub-functions. However, there
> is common logic that affects all of those sub-functions and binds
> everything into a single HW module. If you represent the HW module using
> multiple different DT nodes, it will be hard to correctly represent that
> common logic. Conversely, I see no real advantage to splitting up the DT
> node. I strongly believe we should have a single "hsp" node in DT.

We have 6 HSP block in HW. FYI.

> Internally, the SW driver for that node can be structured however you
> want; it could register with multiple subsystems (mailbox, ...) with
> just one struct device, or the HSP driver could be an MFD device with
> sub-drivers for each separate piece of functionality the HW implements.
> All this can easily be done even while using a single DT node. And
> furthermore, we can add this SW structure later if/when we actually need
> it; in other words, there's no need to change your current patches right
> now, except to remove the nvidia,hsp-function DT property.

Thanks,
-Joseph