Re: [PATCH 03/15] soc: mailbox: Add SPR definition for GCE

[Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥)]

On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 08:42 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>  	 
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
>  On 25/09/2023 07:08, Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥) wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > 
> > Thanks for the reviews.
> > 
> > On Sat, 2023-09-23 at 20:02 +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 21:21, Jason-JH.Lin wrote:
> >>> GCE has specific purpose registers, abbreviated as SPR.
> >>> Client can us SPR to store data or programs.
> >>>
> >>> In CMDQ driver, it allows client to STORE or LOAD data into SPR.
> >>> The value stored in SPR will be cleared after reset GCE HW
> thread.
> >>>
> >>> There are 4 SPR (register index 0 - 3) in every GCE HW thread.
> >>> SPR is thread-independent and HW secure protected.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>>  include/linux/soc/mediatek/mtk-cmdq.h | 5 +++++
> >>
> >> There is no user of this... Why do you add unused defines?
> > 
> > It'll be used in cmdq_sec_insert_backup_cookie() at [PATCH 10/15].
> > Should I merge this patch into [PATCH 10/15]?
> 
> Yes, because what is the purpose of adding unused defines? I asked
> before and did not get answer...
> 

I'm totally agree with merging this patch to the usage parts of mtk-
cmdq-sec-mailbox.c.

But I have no idea why mtk-cmdq-sec-mailbox.c and mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
are not placed in the same maintainer's tree as mtk-cmdq.h and mtk-
cmdq-helper.c, so I just separate them to different patch by tree like
the requirement from previous sent series.

I will re-organized this series to make the definition and the usage of
the code in the same patch.

Regards,
Jason-JH.Lin

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
>