[PATCH 1/2] Documentation: dt: mailbox: Add TI Message Manager

[Nishanth Menon]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Suman Anna <s-anna at ti.com> wrote:
> Hi Nishanth,
>
> On 02/09/2016 12:10 PM, Menon, Nishanth wrote:
>> On 09:43-20160209, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> [..]
>>> Let me prototype this as part of of_xlate and see if I can pull the
>>> qinst data back out.. obviously one negative will be that I will
>>> register *all* valid channels as part of probe.. at least based on
>>> initial code i wrote today morning..
>>
>> OK - I believe I have it working now. How does the following look? If
>> this looks fine to you, then I will post a v2 including the driver
>> update.
>> Changes here:
>>       - dropped the generic message-manager compatible
>>       - dropped child nodes
>>       - moved the valid queue information to driver (no longer in dts)
>>       - rx interrupts per SoC are explicitly named list in binding(and
>>         dts)
>>
>> Texas Instruments' Message Manager Driver
>> ========================================
>>
>> The Texas Instruments' Message Manager is a mailbox controller that has
>> configurable queues selectable at SoC(System on Chip) integration. The Message
>> manager is broken up into queues in different address regions that are called
>> "proxies" - each instance is unidirectional and is instantiated at SoC
>> integration level to indicate receive or transmit path.
>>
>> Message Manager Device Node:
>> ===========================
>> Required properties:
>> --------------------
>> - compatible:         Shall be: "ti,k2g-message-manager"
>> - reg-names           queue_proxy_region - Map the queue proxy region.
>>                       queue_state_debug_region - Map the queue state debug
>>                       region.
>> - reg:                        Contains the register map per reg-names.
>> - #mbox-cells         Shall be 2. Contains the queue ID and proxy ID in that
>>                       order referring to the transfer path.
>> - interrupt-names:    Contains interrupt names matching the rx transfer path
>>                       for a given SoC. Receive interrupts shall be of the
>>                       format: "rx_<QID>_<PID>".
>>                       For ti,k2g-message-manager, this shall contain:
>>                               "rx_005_002", "rx_057_002"
>
> Are these the only two that will ever be supported for
> ti,k2g-message-manager or there can be more in the future? You did
> mention about 11 possible valid qid_pid values for the ARM, and the
> driver match data is
> registering all of those mboxes.


As per the internal TRM, there *only* 2 rx interrupts to the public
world ARM on K2G. I just noticed that the public TRM conveniently
stripped out every single useful information and replaced with
TRM!!!!!*&^*&^&*%&^%&%&!!! Anyways, checked internal documentation to
verify as well. we have multiple output paths to various compute
systems, but only 2 receive paths.

Ofcourse a different SoC will have different integration, which why
the interrupt list will have to be compatible property.

>
>> - interrupts:         Contains the interrupt information corresponding to
>>                       interrupt-names property.
>>
>> Example(K2G):
>> ------------
>>
>>       msgmgr: msgmgr at 02a00000 {
>>               compatible = "ti,k2g-message-manager";
>>               #mbox-cells = <2>;
>>               reg-names = "queue_proxy_region", "queue_state_debug_region";
>>               reg = <0x02a00000 0x400000>, <0x028c3400 0x400>;
>>               interrupt-names = "rx_005_002",
>>                                 "rx_057_002";
>>               interrupts = <GIC_SPI 324 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>                            <GIC_SPI 327 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>       };
>>
>>       pmmc: pmmc {
>>               [...]
>>               mbox-names = "rx", "tx";
>>               # RX queue ID is 5, proxy ID is 2
>>               # TX queue ID is 0, proxy ID is 0
>>               mboxes= <&msgmgr 5 2>,
>>                       <&msgmgr 0 0>;
>>               [...]
>>       };
>
> Yeah, this will also work. I am fine with this approach - my only
> concern was that the probe doesn't have to go parsing all the nodes to
> be able to register the mailbox channels with the mailbox core. Since
> you are registering them using match data, that is not a concern anymore.
>
> Anyway, will let Rob give the final ACK.


Thanks for the review. will wait for Rob and Jassi or post a new rev on monday.

---
Regards,
Nishanth Menon