Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5c545c2866ba075ddb44907940a1dae1d823b8a1.1575019719.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <5c545c2866ba075ddb44907940a1dae1d823b8a1.1575019719.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
From:   Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Dec 2019 14:09:27 -0600
Message-ID: <CABb+yY0qh-qWJWxEaB9_XxmiFb=xP0hOxpm1j54seeT3dMKt2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of
 transport type
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 3:32 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> 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?

Cheers!