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;
From:   Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
CC:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of
 transport type
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of
 transport type
Thread-Index: AQHVppfygI23RUpETUWFTxolQ+nTs6fiPXoAgAAVYACAAcKWgIAEV0ng
Date:   Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:45:34 +0000
Message-ID: <AM0PR04MB448197C42958AE684D021FE288350@AM0PR04MB4481.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <5c545c2866ba075ddb44907940a1dae1d823b8a1.1575019719.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <CAK8P3a3=q2zX9xQo7eZKp7e70rAeNB8VoSjg2aE06QJuSw8y3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200109093442.4jt44eu2zlmjaq3f@vireshk-i7> <20200110122725.GB45077@bogus>
In-Reply-To: <20200110122725.GB45077@bogus>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nxp.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c2d4186f-beee-4089-8480-08d797f4313b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Jan 2020 06:45:34.9193
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 686ea1d3-bc2b-4c6f-a92c-d99c5c301635
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: VDW2P+WcDxt0tuD/d82bvnw9DX8ZJHoHFIDO8rlCsjlFKK4/YzdbtUXB+w5ilGNrCFEepvnCWIK+6W/0lR0GZw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR04MB4498
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Sudeep,

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of
> transport type
>=20
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 03:04:42PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 09-01-20, 09:18, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 10:32 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.or=
g>
> 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 exc=
hange
> of SCMI messages.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
> > >
> > > Conceptually I think this is fine, but as others have said, it would
> > > be better to have another transport implementation posted along with
> > > this to see if the interfaces actually work out.
> >
> > @Sudeep/Vincent: Do you think we can add another transport
> > implementation something right away for it ?
> >
>=20
> Even if we don't add new transport right away, I would like to see if the
> requirements are met. I will take a look at you v2 with that in mind anyw=
ays.
> We need not wait, we I want to see people think it meets their requiremen=
t. I
> will also add couple of guys working on virtio transport for SCMI when I
> respond to your v2. Thanks for posting it.
>=20
> > @Peng ?
> >
> Peng, Did you get a chance to try this with SMC ? If SCMI was the only
> usecase, you can try this approach instead of mailbox, now that no one ha=
s
> any objects to this approach conceptually. Please use v2 as base and upda=
te
> us.

I will try that, but might be a bit later.

Thanks,
Peng.

>=20
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep