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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 F0B08C2D0CE for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:38:34 +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 BD80124125 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:38:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="MvPkKvMN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD80124125 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=j5hK3IEi2JNdo6sKmxAtL0w/+4JspcboWcskgmULT9w=; b=MvPkKvMNQtB1Ed Eb+tN7bRDLgcp8NibRLYnrmqRS23m62sTkD1vt2gtLbAn7rnXYqKYljsOJHDasIMDNGtQfhUvgPlX yEyKgJ6P/wfZTR5ygnyjNkCRyo9AnWhybxPosWWC30bmUsCGpY45TJPDUvE4tEOJk/kr3MlFBJQ7q C8QjAETDF7OUfBbCJrPfrGHkvQvoAltU+BJWZTuzMDPcJIowy6tsUlNrmGdkumrhpAOlGQEPUjb1G S+OqAuGLUWYNcDn7+epMskuowWpgUhpb8SryCAQmGSnZeWlaIGzjRYysyyU2FjBgHm7EuzrWnm4Nk G0+tF4z7FDVzCdZb11/w==; 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 1ityQ6-00015b-8Z; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:38:34 +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 1ityPz-00014Z-8a for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:38:33 +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 2BD521FB; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:38:25 -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 EB3F93F6C4; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 10:38:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:38:18 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of the transport type Message-ID: <20200121183818.GA11522@bogus> References: <4b74f1b6c1f9653241a1b5754525e230b3d76a3f.1579595093.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-20200121_103827_347756_156221B5 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 19.75 ) 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: Peng Fan , Viresh Kumar , Jassi Brar , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , peter.hilber@opensynergy.com, Linux ARM , Sudeep Holla , cristian.marussi@arm.com 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, Jan 21, 2020 at 04:11:11PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:27 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 on 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. > > > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > > --- > > @Sudeep: Can you please help me getting this tested? > > Sure(I may need to rebase on top of -next to test on top of what's queued for v5.6) > > V2->V3: > > - Added more ops to the structure to read/write/memcpy data > > - Payload is moved to mailbox.c and is handled in transport specific way > > now. This resulted in lots of changes. > > This addresses the comments I had about the implementation. > Thanks for review and all the suggestions Arnd. > It's still hard for me to judge whether this is a good abstraction as > long as there is only one backend in the framework, but I see nothing > immediately wrong with it either. > Peter and Peng(both in cc) is trying out virtio and smc/hvc based transport respectively. Hopefully they will raise concerns(if any) with the abstraction. -- Regards, Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel