From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=104.47.2.76; helo=eur01-db5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com; envelope-from=sami.mujawar@arm.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db5eur01on0076.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.2.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 594E32116DFB5 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 12:31:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armh.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-arm-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=25mg8exrlVFPmvAjLmsZBF9kIwOCQdXItSgjoszYHUw=; b=NNDkxk1VGc9O+RGDESuMiOf7vhsYGTh4MPsSsLUwfxX63hQZ4a/MkPn3bKHD0fRSJjRh0iyQ8jD1++HlDVcGFaOMzgcfQCxAukkOTH0sH+QvG18KBAXv2y4yKWvw7o+NmYFEJ8ldByJNrbSxtUQ+qd0tEL9TfSVG9u1ZvjyRZzE= Received: from AM4PR0802MB2372.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (10.172.218.144) by AM4PR0802MB2163.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (10.172.217.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1294.27; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 20:31:53 +0000 Received: from AM4PR0802MB2372.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::fd1c:4e1:81b1:8deb]) by AM4PR0802MB2372.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::fd1c:4e1:81b1:8deb%2]) with mapi id 15.20.1294.034; Fri, 9 Nov 2018 20:31:52 +0000 From: Sami Mujawar To: Leif Lindholm , Jeff Brasen CC: "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , Ard Biesheuvel , Girish Pathak , nd Thread-Topic: [PATCH] ArmPkg/ArmScmiDxe: Add clock enable function Thread-Index: AQHUeDX3tN/Au3JdbUSBr3CWM/S/A6VHq/aAgAAYJQCAAAFTAIAAA/SAgAAbTqA= Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 20:31:52 +0000 Message-ID: References: <6dbe50db1293266db7588630fc97328276e82843.1541699412.git.jbrasen@nvidia.com> <20181109140951.jcworswoffwot2q4@bivouac.eciton.net> <20181109183018.asma3ynwkr7dww57@bivouac.eciton.net> <20181109184911.ykwoto4ewk7boeei@bivouac.eciton.net> In-Reply-To: <20181109184911.ykwoto4ewk7boeei@bivouac.eciton.net> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Sami.Mujawar@arm.com; x-originating-ip: [217.140.96.140] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM4PR0802MB2163; 6:lKZPbJxSgaCnqDbyMJg983C7Wk2mpiTf5zO3rA0MwL+jMSDMPlbZrdKYfsQrDZayF0kpTht+KbxNi4n8eH+cwa9UHna6D2oTX64xjlCK6MUVHP76MZxl/4sUNHg6A3ZdK1Z9nk9h5NuzfYo8/OXerUgHxw+JMCg39ZuJw3mogkTI/xChS6Lf5/6vSMHHEp8PYsPArTY/zfi9shIzUMt4DZLm/b0oqVWmbcAIKHciwVY621atyHWN9RmfyZ90uTUQ73DUAiP1d8z1rCf9K7omWp43jQ1vaD6qDjTFYDMQbidVW4edXybXHEV6B4z3XALTtBzdsibqmbeuBSbfwZ6lBQoaDRvc7dpoWjyEIjOC5wNylEME6dQqvf6Cxxy3MKjA7boe4USAsOsp8uRWaf2XezSqC9MRfvwzIL5rt2/5CjUDX6g4xJ36cyX6kKp0qSnphG50swpW5dXgGa5dfA/BZQ==; 5:Bpgim+hG9fthBSRcLgU8vE/oU6C91tYYND9Agr8jKd3sb21QMB+wumgWnjBGztQ96kP8iRsiIn9B8dPNtxQ4MDPfvKEFPHRQA0ry7IQz/AzADVzbOgajCCpVPkZ3UksqKSpP4Df9dyImCCk+WhIXlifthoJlWmGZgt6pMQWY1PE=; 7:F3rTlgvsOJDWm3BzpV37nyd7q7mm7rc1Apd15LkNgYeiYupNpCUC9t4k+Lj3hfZGjCevmY5dZrbEN5howTt9iFCDVoYqgUlzicppjhW2f3wF1EbMYlhRL8XGG71+cw3ea4r+tjW/5/PdzoysAbkzTA== x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;SOR; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5c2d26a1-3825-4497-5e89-08d64682625e x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600074)(711020)(4618075)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:AM4PR0802MB2163; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM4PR0802MB2163: nodisclaimer: True x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(162533806227266)(278428928389397)(18589796830644)(180628864354917); x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040522)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3231382)(944501410)(52105095)(3002001)(93006095)(93001095)(6055026)(148016)(149066)(150057)(6041310)(20161123560045)(20161123564045)(20161123562045)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123558120)(201708071742011)(7699051)(76991095); SRVR:AM4PR0802MB2163; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM4PR0802MB2163; x-forefront-prvs: 08512C5403 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(366004)(39860400002)(136003)(396003)(346002)(376002)(13464003)(189003)(199004)(61684003)(14454004)(256004)(4326008)(8676002)(81156014)(106356001)(105586002)(9686003)(6116002)(86362001)(71190400001)(3846002)(71200400001)(55016002)(81166006)(305945005)(229853002)(6436002)(5660300001)(2906002)(478600001)(7736002)(53936002)(99286004)(74316002)(72206003)(6246003)(25786009)(316002)(54906003)(186003)(110136005)(93886005)(66066001)(26005)(2900100001)(446003)(68736007)(476003)(486006)(102836004)(33656002)(6506007)(53546011)(19627235002)(7696005)(76176011)(8936002)(11346002)(97736004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM4PR0802MB2163; H:AM4PR0802MB2372.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: arm.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: xv40COpySLslKQMA/5dtqTHIKlZ3a0aH7qA6umVS0G8ziz9tAjXPGMu9sxbxPbq6Ggg4Cp3M9d8OseZF8CwsyeXwSHav14CNYbClvoNpAOJFz6+MqjwnT9Py3KiPcmaLMxxuWLLWo0kp9gD5j70vJ5C9D3q1HC5Z9QErODR4LV9DOoTFtP/3+qR/aLNf2oSVrWYgMZL0v8f49JDY+B2UMNSkZ2HYW3PMEgNUIxLe8bJVRUJ6LhzfXMUcsxjJzKduw1b0OgbLLVRUYYrG1lSVEFEqO2vJSd1dhate4GAPDbNU4t+JXdisaWCN6vdMxOknzD3CII4wT6lNL3MUNA8l5UCF+yOEtZld11LAVB1mt/s= spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: arm.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 5c2d26a1-3825-4497-5e89-08d64682625e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Nov 2018 20:31:52.8297 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: f34e5979-57d9-4aaa-ad4d-b122a662184d X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM4PR0802MB2163 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ArmPkg/ArmScmiDxe: Add clock enable function X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2018 20:31:57 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -----Original Message----- From: Leif Lindholm =20 Sent: 09 November 2018 06:49 PM To: Jeff Brasen Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Ard Biesheuvel ; Gi= rish Pathak ; Sami Mujawar Subject: Re: [PATCH] ArmPkg/ArmScmiDxe: Add clock enable function On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 06:35:02PM +0000, Jeff Brasen wrote: > > 1. Add new ArmScmiClock2Protocol.h + guid > > 2. Add new guid and document that you have to use that guid for the = enable function > > 3. Add new guid under old name and have the old guid installed on > > the handle as well, this would keep things fairly clean but > > would have a guid that wouldn't map to a protocol in header > > form. > > 4. Just change the protocol without changing the guid, this has > > the reverse issue of the change I made (except errors can > > result in a crash) (don't really like this option) >=20 > I think my (quite puritan) preference would be 5. Add another guid,=20 > describe it in the same .h file. >=20 > For example, see (among several others)=20 > EFI_FIRMWARE_VOLUME_BLOCK_PROTOCOL/EFI_FIRMWARE_VOLUME_BLOCK2_PROTOCOL > in MdePkg/Include/Protocol/FirmwareVolumeBlock.h. > (This may be what you mean by 2?) >=20 > [JB] Yes this was what I was thinking with #2 OK, cool, then we're on the same page. [SAMI] I think this would be the right approach. > It's a bit of a sledgehammer, but it is a well known and common=20 > pattern in edk2. >=20 > However, if we do this, I would prefer to take the opportunity to add=20 > any new functions not already implemented at the same time. Do you=20 > know if we have other missing calls? >=20 > Now, this _isn't_ a protocol described by any external specification,=20 > so we don't need to be quite as rigid as for public interfaces. > Basically, there shouldn't be (non-debug/non-devtool) dynamic=20 > applications making use of this protocol in the first place. (If we=20 > think there should be, we need to document this GUID and protocol in a=20 > spec somewhere.) So in reality, I think 4 would also be a valid thing=20 > to do. >=20 > But I do want feedback from the original author. >=20 > [JB] Sounds good, I think Girish is out of office until 11/21 Yeah. I'd take feedback from Sami as well :) But both me and Ard will be at= plumbers next week, and we are expecting the stable tag to happen then as = well - so that is basically lost anyway. Regards, Leif