RE: [PATCH v6 02/11] firmware: xilinx: Add Zynqmp firmware driver

[Jolly Shah]

Hi Sudeep,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sudeep Holla [mailto:sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 7:05 AM
> To: Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@xxxxxxxxxx>; ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx;
> mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx; keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx; mturquette@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; linux-clk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx>; Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/11] firmware: xilinx: Add Zynqmp firmware driver
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/04/18 20:38, Jolly Shah wrote:
> > From: Rajan Vaja <rajanv@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This patch is adding communication layer with firmware.
> > Firmware driver provides an interface to firmware APIs.
> > Interface APIs can be used by any driver to communicate to
> > PMUFW(Platform Management Unit). All requests go through ATF.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rajan Vaja <rajanv@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jolly Shah <jollys@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * get_set_conduit_method() - Choose SMC or HVC based communication
> > + * @np:		Pointer to the device_node structure
> > + *
> > + * Use SMC or HVC-based functions to communicate with EL2/EL3.
> > + *
> > + * Return: Returns 0 on success or error code  */ static int
> > +get_set_conduit_method(struct device_node *np) {
> > +	const char *method;
> > +
> > +	if (of_property_read_string(np, "method", &method)) {
> > +		pr_warn("%s missing \"method\" property\n", __func__);
> > +		return -ENXIO;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (!strcmp("hvc", method)) {
> > +		do_fw_call = do_fw_call_hvc;
> > +	} else if (!strcmp("smc", method)) {
> > +		do_fw_call = do_fw_call_smc;
> > +	} else {
> > +		pr_warn("%s Invalid \"method\" property: %s\n",
> > +			__func__, method);
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> > +
> 
> Mark R did some cleanup around SMCCC conduits[1]. It makes sense to base this
> on top that. But if you manage to push this for v4.18, then you may need to wait
> for that to be merged and clean it up after v4.18
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep

Mark R did change for SMCCC enums and we are not using any SMCCC enums so we don't have any dependency on that.

Thanks,
Jolly Shah

> 
> [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg650305.html