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;
Date:   Thu, 30 Jan 2020 10:21:04 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc:     Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of the
 transport type
Message-ID: <20200130102104.GA48466@bogus>
References: <20200130094103.mrz7ween6ukfa4fk@vireshk-i7>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200130094103.mrz7ween6ukfa4fk@vireshk-i7>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 03:11:03PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30-01-20, 10:25, Etienne Carriere wrote:
> > I've made a first port (draft) for adding new transport channels, next
> > to existing mailbox channel, on top of your change.
> > You can find it here: https://github.com/etienne-lms/linux/pull/1.
> >
> > I don't have specific comments on your change but the one below.
> > I think SMT header should move out of mailbox.c, but that may be a bit
> > out of the scope of your change.
>
> If it is guaranteed that someone will end up using those routines
> apart from mailbox.c, then surely it can be done.
>

I thought about it and decided to take up when we add new transport
instead of doing now and having to redo again when we add new transport
mostly SMC/HVC.

> > I would prefer an optional mak_txdone callback:
> >
> >     if (info->desc->ops->mark_txdone)
> >        info->desc->ops->mark_txdone(cinfo, ret);
>
> So you are sure that mark_txdone won't be required in your case? I can
> make it optional then.
>

Yes this can be done. Might even help virtio and keeps Peter happy :)

--
Regards,
Sudeep