Hi Etienne,
On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 11:07, Etienne Carriere etienne.carriere@linaro.org wrote:
Hello Simon,
This change introduces SCMI agent driver in U-Boot in the firmware U-class. (...) Changes in v2: (...)
Note: review comments on defining a uclass and sandbox for SCMI transport drivers are NOT addressed in this v2. Main issue is that there is no driver/device defined for SCMI transport layer as well as and no defined compatible ID in the SCMI DT bindings documentation.
I'd still like to see this. You can define an API with a header file. It is certainly easier if the DT binding can cover the transport type with a separate subnode.
The bindings are already defined for scmi (ref is the Linux kernel source tree) and there is no sub-node currently defined for the scmi driver transport configuration. It's done through the compatible property and dedicated optional properties. I think changing the scmi DT binding is a bit out of the scope of my patch series :)
Fair enough. The bindings are pretty linux-specific of course, since that is the only user. In general it seems hard to change them for U-Boot although I haven't tried in years.
But that doesn't stop you creating a uclass for the transport. It will also allow you to create a sandbox impl so you can add a test for this code.
Ok, thanks, I understand.
Also the two interfaces should really be in separate files rather than using #ifdefs, I think.
I'll send a v3 with the implementation over several source files and the requested uclass/sandbox. I think I'll create sub-directory drivers/firmware/scmi/ for the source files.
I think that's a good idea.
Thanks again for the feedback on this v2.
You're welcome.
Regards, Simon