RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] dt-bindings: irqchip: imx mu work as msi controller

[Frank Li]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 4:45 PM
> To: Frank Li <frank.li@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx;
> s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kw@xxxxxxxxx; bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Peng Fan
> <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>; Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx>;
> jdmason@xxxxxxxx; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; festevam@xxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-
> imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; kishon@xxxxxx; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx;
> ntb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; lznuaa@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] dt-bindings: irqchip: imx mu work as
> msi controller
> 
> Caution: EXT Email
> 
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 19:59:44 +0100,
> Frank Li <frank.li@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > And I stand by my initial request. "a" doesn't convey any sort of
> > > useful information. Why not "I" and "II", while we're at it? Or
> > > something even funkier?
> >
> > MU spec use term "a" and "b",  user have to map "I" an "II" to
> > "a" and "b" when read MU spec and code. it is not straightforward.
> >
> > I quote a part of spec.
> > " The MU is connected as a peripheral under the Peripheral bus on both
> sides-on
> > the Processor A-side, the Processor A Peripheral Bus, and on the Processor
> B side,
> > the Processor B Peripheral Bus."
> >
> > Rob Herring and Marc Zynginer:
> > I can change to any name, which you agree both.
> >
> > Some options:
> > 1. "a", "b"
> > 2. "a-side", "b-side"
> > 3. "a-facing", "b-facing"
> > 4. "I", "II"
> 
> Use the wording indicated in the spec: "processor-a-side", and
> "processor-b-side". This is what I asked the first place.

@Rob Herring:  Do you agree this name?

[Frank Li] 

> 
>         M.
> 
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.