On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 7:50 AM Jassi Brar [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 9:12 PM Jjian Zhou [off-list ref] wrote:

.....

quoted

+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/slab.h>
+
+struct mtk_vcp_mbox_priv {

Maybe 'mtk_vcp_mbox' is a more appropriate name ?

quoted

+       void __iomem *base;
+       struct device *dev;
+       struct mbox_controller mbox;
+       const struct mtk_vcp_mbox_cfg *cfg;
+       struct mtk_ipi_info ipi_recv;

Maybe also have "struct mbox_chan chan[1]; " so that you don't have to
allocate one during the probe.

Also if you have  "struct mbox_controller mbox;" as the first member,
you could simply typecast that to get this structure.
Something like "struct mpfs_mbox" in mailbox-mpfs.c

I read somewhere that this way of subclassing is not recommended.
Instead the base class should explicitly not be the first member.
And then container_of() should be used.

I don't remember where I read this though. But I think the explicit
container_of() is easier for understanding the intent.

ChenYu

....

quoted

+
+static struct mbox_chan *mtk_vcp_mbox_xlate(struct mbox_controller *mbox,
+                                           const struct of_phandle_args *sp)
+{
+       if (sp->args_count)
+               return NULL;
+
+       return mbox->chans;

return &mbox->chans[0]   seems better.

thnx