On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:05 PM Oleksij Rempel [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 09:28:09PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Oleksij Rempel [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Each MU has four pairs of rx/tx data register with four rx/tx interrupts
which can also be used as a separate channel.

Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt    | 28 +++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt
index 90e4905dfc69..9efd3a9ade44 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt

@@ -18,11 +18,33 @@ Messaging Unit Device Node:
 Required properties:
 -------------------
 - compatible : should be "fsl,<chip>-mu", the supported chips include
-               imx8qxp, imx8qm.
+               imx6sx, imx7s, imx8qxp, imx8qm.
+               The "fsl,imx6sx-mu" compatible is seen as generic and should
+               be included together with SoC specific compatible.
 - reg :                Should contain the registers location and length
 - interrupts : Interrupt number. The interrupt specifier format depends
                on the interrupt controller parent.
-- #mbox-cells:  Must be 0. Number of cells in a mailbox
+- #mbox-cells:  Must be 2.

This seems like modifying the bindings. But since nothing exists yet,
maybe we should merge patch 1 and 2 ?

For some weeks I already asked to squash this patches.. it was not
ACKed. We can try again... @Rob, @Aisheng, should I merge this two
patches?

Whatever you like. I don't really care.

Rob