[External] Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] dt-bindings: firmware: Document ffitbl binding

[运辉崔]

Hi Conor,

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 2:45 PM Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 11:43:55AM +0800, 运辉崔 wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 11:07 PM Conor Dooley <conor at kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 07:42:51PM +0800, Yunhui Cui wrote:
> > > > Add the description for ffitbl subnode.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yunhui Cui <cuiyunhui at bytedance.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/ffitbl.txt   | 27 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  MAINTAINERS                                   |  1 +
> > > >  2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
> > > >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/ffitbl.txt
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/ffitbl.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/ffitbl.txt
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..c42368626199
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/ffitbl.txt
> > >
> > > Firstly, new dt-bindings need to be done in yaml, not in text form.
> > > Secondly, you didn't re-run get_maintainer.pl after adding this binding,
> > > so you have not CCed any of the other dt-binding maintainers nor the
> > > devicetree mailing list.
> >
> > Re-run get_maintainer.pl and added maintainers into the maillist.
> > emm.. There is some *txt in
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/, isn't it?
>
> There might be, but that's not an excuse for adding _new_ ones, sorry.

Okay, I'll update it on v4.


> > > > +FFI(FDT FIRMWARE INTERFACE) driver
> > > > +
> > > > +Required properties:
> > > > + - entry             : acpi or smbios root pointer, u64
> > > > + - reg                       : acpi or smbios version, u32
> > >
> > > Please go look at any other dt-binding (or the example schema) as to how
> > > these properties should be used. A "reg" certainly should not be being
> > > used to store the revision...
> >
> > Okay, If so，I'll add a property "version" into the dts instead of
> > "reg", just like, WDYT?
> > ffitbl {
>
> Firstly, I'd much rather you spelt this out, like "ffi-table".
>
> >     smbios {
> >         entry = "";
>
> I still don't understand why "entry", which is an address, is being
> represented by an empty string.
> I also don't really get why you have not used "reg" to describe its
> start address and size.
>
> >         version = < 0x02 >;
>
> Probably missing a vendor prefix, and the spaces are unusual, but better
> than it was, yes.

Based on your review, I plan to modify it as follows:

ffi-table {
#address-cells = <2>;
#size-cells = <0>;
        smbios at entry1 {
                compatible = "smbios";
                reg = <entry1>;
                version = <2>;
        };
        smbios at entry2 {
                compatible = "smbios";
                reg = <entry2>;
                version = <3>;
        };
        acpi at entry {
                compatible = "acpi";
                reg = <entry>;
                version = <6>;
        };
}

The reason why #size-cells is 0 is because only one item is needed,
#address-cells = <2>; because two u32 are needed to express the 64-bit
address.
The memory for the SMBIOS table itself will be preserved in "reserved
memory" , so we don't have to worry about this piece of memory getting
corrupted. ACPI as well. WDYT?

> >     }
> >    acpi {
> >          entry = "";
> >          version = < 0x06 >;
> >   }
> > }
>
> Thanks,
> Conor.

Thanks,
Yunhui