[PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms

[Sudeep Holla]

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 10:39:53AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce
> > property mbox-rx-timeout-ms
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:17:14AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan at nxp.com>
> > >
> > > System Controller Management Interface(SCMI) firmwares might
> > have
> > > different designs by SCMI firmware developers. So the maximum
> > receive
> > > channel timeout value might also varies in the various designs.
> > >
> > > So introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms to let each platform could
> > > set its own timeout value in device tree.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan at nxp.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > V2:
> > >  Drop defaults, update description.
> > >
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 6
> > ++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git
> > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > index ebf384e76df1..dcac0b36c76f 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > @@ -121,6 +121,12 @@ properties:
> > >        atomic mode of operation, even if requested.
> > >      default: 0
> > >
> > > +  max-rx-timeout-ms:
> > > +    description:
> > > +      An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, representing
> > the
> > > +      mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The value
> > should
> > > +      be a non-zero value if set.
> > > +
> > 
> > IIRC, you had the min and max constraint in the earlier response. You
> > need to have rushed and posted another version before I could respond
> > with my preference.
> > 
> > So there is no rush, these are v6.12 material. Take time for respining
> > and give some time for the review.
> 
> Sure. I just not sure what the maximum should be set, so I drop
> the minimum and maximum from my previous email.
> 

Worst case we can just have min constraint to indicate it must be non-zero
value as you have mentioned above and drop that statement as it becomes
explicit with the constraint.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep