[PATCH 1/8] dt-bindings: firmware: arm, scpi: Move arm, scpi-shmem to json schema

[Rob Herring]

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 3:20 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 09:15:48AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:25:54PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 07:28:00PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > > > Move the SRAM and shared memory binding for SCPI into the existing
> > > > Generic on-chip SRAM. We just need to update the compatible list and
> > > > there-by remove the whole old text format binding for the same.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt at kernel.org>
> > > > Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman at baylibre.com>
> > > > Cc: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong at baylibre.com>
> > > > Cc: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet at baylibre.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt          | 15 ---------------
> > > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml  |  1 +
> > > >  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt
> > > > index bcd6c3ec471e..bcb8b3d61e68 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt
> > > > @@ -56,21 +56,6 @@ Sub-nodes
> > > >   node. It can be non linear and hence provide the mapping of identifiers
> > > >   into the clock-output-names array.
> > > >
> > > > -SRAM and Shared Memory for SCPI
> > > > --------------------------------
> > > > -
> > > > -A small area of SRAM is reserved for SCPI communication between application
> > > > -processors and SCP.
> > > > -
> > > > -The properties should follow the generic mmio-sram description found in [3]
> > > > -
> > > > -Each sub-node represents the reserved area for SCPI.
> > > > -
> > > > -Required sub-node properties:
> > > > -- reg : The base offset and size of the reserved area with the SRAM
> > > > -- compatible : should be "arm,scp-shmem" for Non-secure SRAM based
> > >
> > > > +            - arm,scpi-shmem
> > >
> > > Which is correct? There's not a single other occurrance in the kernel
> > > tree of either.
> > >
> >
> > Right I was thinking removing it but wasn't sure if any downstream DTS
> > have used this as it has been in the binding for a while now.
> >
>
> Sent it too early before I completed, we don't have explicit check for
> these compatible in the code. We just use phandles directly.

But which one is correct? "arm,scp-shmem" or "arm,scpi-shmem"

I can fix up when applying.

Rob