On 10/08/17 20:28, Rob Herring wrote:

On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 03:31:28PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:

quoted

This patch adds devicetree binding for System Control and Management
Interface (SCMI) Message Protocol used between the Application Cores(AP)
and the System Control Processor(SCP). The MHU peripheral provides a
mechanism for inter-processor communication between SCP's M3 processor
and AP.

SCP offers control and management of the core/cluster power states,
various power domain DVFS including the core/cluster, certain system
clocks configuration, thermal sensors and many others.

SCMI protocol is developed as better replacement to the existing SCPI
which is not flexible and easily extensible.

Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <redacted>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt | 174 +++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 174 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..33c16be58e72
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+System Control and Management Interface (SCMI) Message Protocol
+----------------------------------------------------------
+
+The SCMI is intended to allow agents such as OSPM to manage various functions
+that are provided by the hardware platform it is running on, including power
+and performance functions.
+
+This binding is intended to define the interface the firmware implementing
+the SCMI as described in ARM document number ARM DUI 0922B ("ARM System Control
+and Management Interface Platform Design Document")[0] provide for OSPM in
+the device tree.
+
+Required properties:

Please define this is a subnode of /firmware node.

Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of that.

Ideally, should we move PSCI and SCPI also under that ?

Also should we contain all firmware bindings under
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/firmware/ ?

[..]

quoted

+PM domain consumers
+===================

How consumers work is already defined elsewhere.

Agreed, will drop it.

[..]

quoted

+
+scmi_protocol: scmi at 2e000000 {

The unit address is not valid.

Ah, copy paste, will drop. Need to fix in scpi bindings too.

quoted

+	compatible = "arm,scmi";
+	method = "mailbox-doorbell";

Is this not implied by the mboxes property? 

Indeed, remnants from v1. I removed in the definition but left in the
example.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep