Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: soc: ti: Document the ti,tda54-mcu-scm-conf binding

[Moteen Shah]

On 02/11/26 12:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 02/11/2026 06:20, Moteen Shah wrote:
> > > > +  ti,proxy-id:
> > > > +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> > > > +    minimum: 0
> > > > +    maximum: 7
> > > > +    description:
> > > > +      Proxy region (0-7) through which this node's clients access
> > > > +      claimable registers and their fault status registers.
> > > I don't get the need of this property. You have a one, specific device, so
> > > why the proxy id would vary per board?
> > >
> > > It also looks like re-implementing access controllers.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Krzysztof
> >
> > Thanks for the review, Krzysztof. I’ll drop the redundant “binding” from
> > the subject.
> >
> > ti,proxy-id is not intended to vary by board. It selects the proxy
> Then it is implied by compatible, no?
>
> > window used by this Linux instance. One use case we need to support is
> > running two VMs with different proxy IDs, with each VM’s DT describing
> > the proxy it uses.
> > The driver reads the ID from DT and performs register accesses through
> > that proxy; it does not allocate proxy IDs or decide which VM uses which
> > one.
> And if not, my statement still feels applicable.

I think my previous reply did not explain why this property belongs in 
the binding.

In the current design, reg describes the SCM region and ti,proxy-id 
selects one of its proxy windows for this Linux instance. The compatible 
describes the SCM hardware; it does not select a proxy window. Our use 
case is separate VM DTs for two Linux instances using different proxy 
IDs. For a single non-virtualized Linux instance, the DT has one fixed 
ID but it can differ between VM instances. The property selects the view 
used by the driver; it does not allocate or grant access to a proxy. The 
information to the driver about the proxy via which it is supposed to 
perform the claim/lock operations, need to be supplied for a particular 
VM instance. I think DT would be the right way to do it. If you think 
some other way would be better please feel free to suggest.

Regards,
Moteen