[PATCH 13/15] mailbox: mediatek: Add mt8188 support for CMDQ secure driver

[Jason-JH Lin (林睿祥)]

Hi Krzysztof,

On Sat, 2023-09-23 at 20:09 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>  	 
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
>  On 18/09/2023 21:22, Jason-JH.Lin wrote:
> > Add mt8188 support for CMDQ secure driver.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jason-JH.Lin <jason-jh.lin at mediatek.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
> b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
> > index 3940b9f8e774..4e047dc916b9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
> > @@ -750,6 +750,7 @@ static const struct gce_plat gce_plat_v8 = {
> >  .thread_nr = 32,
> >  .shift = 3,
> >  .control_by_sw = true,
> > +.has_sec = true,
> 
> No, you just added it patch ago. Do not add broken code and fix it.
> Are
> there some KPIs in Mediatek to have patch count?
> 

This patch is different from [PATCH 14/15] at the gce_plat:
[PATCH 13/15] is adding the flag to gce_plat_v8 for mediatek,mt8188-gce
[PATCH 14/15] is adding the flag to gce_plat_v6 for mediatek,mt8195-gce

I'm sorry about that gce_plat are too similar to cause the confusion.

I'vd built the whole series before sending it, so I think it won't
break the code and I think there are no KPIs on the patch count.

Should I merge [PATCH 13/15] and [PATCH 14/15] in to [PATCH 9/15] to
show how it works?

Regards,
Jason-JH.Lin

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
>