From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stanimir Varbanov Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Qualcomm Resource Power Manager driver Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 11:15:24 +0300 Message-ID: <538C329C.8060009@mm-sol.com> References: <1401211721-19712-1-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ns.mm-sol.com ([37.157.136.199]:38438 "EHLO extserv.mm-sol.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751708AbaFBIPh (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2014 04:15:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Kumar Gala , Bjorn Andersson , Samuel Ortiz , Lee Jones , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Josh Cartwright , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm-msm Hi Bjorn, Thanks for the patches. > Lately I've been working on rpm, rpm-smd, smem, smd, smsm, smp2p > patches for mainline. > It could be argued that smd is a bus and should go in drivers/bus, but > for the rest I fear that we just created drivers/soc/qcom as another > dumping ground for things; a "Qualcomm specific drivers/mfd". Do we have some obstacles to not use a "common mailbox framework" for this IPC (shared memory) communication. It looks that it fits very well with our needs for this rpm-regulator and future submitting of smd driver? -- regards, Stan