Re: [PATCH 06/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Add System Telemetry driver

On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 04:15:29PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 11:27:02 +0100
Cristian Marussi [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 05:23:28PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 25 Sep 2025 21:35:50 +0100
Cristian Marussi [off-list ref] wrote:
  

quoted

Add a new SCMI System Telemetry driver which gathers platform Telemetry
data through the new the SCMI Telemetry protocol and expose all of the
discovered Telemetry data events on a dedicated pseudo-filesystem that
can be used to interactively configure SCMI Telemetry and access its
provided data.  

Hi,
 

quoted

I'm not a fan of providing yet another filesystem but you didn't

"did" was what this was meant to say.

Sorry for the confusing garbage comment from me!

quoted

quoted

lay out reasoning in the cover letter.  

Sorry, I dont understand..you mean here that I did NOT provide enough reasons
why I am adopting a new FS approach ? ... or I misunderstood the English ?

.. because I did provide a lot of reasons (for my point-of-view) to go
for a new FS in the cover-letter...

quoted

One non trivial issue is that you'll have to get filesystem review on this.
My review is rather superficial but a few things stood out.  

Well yes I would have expected that, but now the FS implementation
internals of this series is definetely immature and to be reworked (to
the extent of using a well-know deprecated FS mount api at first..)

So I posted this V1 to lay-out the ideas and the effective FS API layout
but I was planning to extend the review audience once I have reworked fully
the series FS bits in the next V2...

I'd suggest ABI docs for v2. That will match what you have in the cover letter
but put it in the somewhat formal description format of Documentation/ABI/

Oh yes of course... the while docs/ stuff is still TBD...btw I am not even
sure if the whole driver will be required to be moved into fs/ as a
requirement while doing filesystem review...I suppose I will leave this
sort of reworks for the next reviews cycles....

...and...if I may ask... is it linux-fsdevel the ML for this fs-related
stuff I suppose...not sure about maintainers looking at MAINTAINERS ...

Thanks a lot for having a look Jonathan.
Cristian