From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF990C32771 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 11:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 802DF2072C for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 11:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="D0Ub7vbc" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 802DF2072C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=M37Ur3/KGUax4E4WjE1FJ10leuHdHqmA9LCO1MhZnpc=; b=D0Ub7vbckAtMc7 Ca27KqIEYuUmp42McJLURYg6zC+QAAt/1wckOKhFsxlssRExnDsHNysm3Koje27F7Rbpu8pH2+WT5 +snvXq2K6uhg3hj5j7MQX+f+x1bs8rq3/93bgTRe31WXc+T7qE4jan2CO6eQxGN9HgCnVN0fIs3zU JMiZD1+e0xHiyqvVdmGAYM5PUSC8mKEPMQkOH5RBk3XjvbqYPe6wjbUv9ieMyvZLTkrhBAaXSCpC0 1IrTbZPkXtUrmEgZf5pmlyPXdBjhQx/QRCHI6NP45GT+/DRRGkGwui8weeL2yl86eIfrGK3agtgmM C4kWGmhFTfaKozXC3KJg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ioQ7Q-0001Ab-Vy; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 11:00:20 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ioQ7N-00017b-EP for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 11:00:18 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF869328; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 03:00:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC7843F534; Mon, 6 Jan 2020 03:00:14 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2020 11:00:07 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Jassi Brar Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of transport type Message-ID: <20200106110007.GA54466@bogus> References: <5c545c2866ba075ddb44907940a1dae1d823b8a1.1575019719.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200106_030017_529620_C31BB945 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.84 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Viresh Kumar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Sudeep Holla , linux-arm-kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 02:09:27PM -0600, Jassi Brar wrote: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 3:32 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > The SCMI specification is fairly independent of the transport protocol, > > which can be a simple mailbox (already implemented) or anything else. > > The current Linux implementation however is very much dependent of the > > mailbox transport layer. > > > > This patch makes the SCMI core code (driver.c) independent of the > > mailbox transport layer and moves all mailbox related code to a new > > file: mailbox.c. > > > > We can now implement more transport protocols to transport SCMI > > messages. > > > > The transport protocols just need to provide struct scmi_transport_ops, > > with its version of the callbacks to enable exchange of SCMI messages. > > > We can either add new transport layer between SCMI and Mailbox layers, > or we can write new transport as a mailbox driver (which I always > thought could be a usecase). Right now I am of no strong opinion > either way. Depends, what other transport do you have in mind? > To be more clear, this patch abstracts the SCMI transport so that mailbox can be one of the transport. The plan is to add SMC/HVC, SMC/HVC over SPCI, vitio based transport as alternative to mailbox. These are neither added as mailbox driver nor transport layer between SCMI and Mailbox. E.g.: we either use Peng's SMC based mailbox driver as is or add a new transport independent of mailbox framework here as SCMI transport. -- Regards, Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel