Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200514145927.17555-1-kishon@ti.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200514145927.17555-1-kishon@ti.com>
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 10:11:09 -0600
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqKxe5FtZfiQKcQFFLOM5F52kx-q8vZspPTXhcWg+3rJvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] Implement NTB Controller using multiple PCI EP
To:     Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>
Cc:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Jon Mason <jdmason@kudzu.us>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        Allen Hubbe <allenbh@gmail.com>,
        Tom Joseph <tjoseph@cadence.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntb@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:59 AM Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com> wrote:
>
> This series is about implementing SW defined NTB using
> multiple endpoint instances. This series has been tested using
> 2 endpoint instances in J7 connected to two DRA7 boards. However there
> is nothing platform specific for the NTB functionality.
>
> This was presented in Linux Plumbers Conference. The presentation
> can be found @ [1]

I'd like to know why putting this into DT is better than configfs.
Does it solve some problem? Doing things in userspace is so much
easier and more flexible than modifying and updating a DT.

I don't really think the PCI endpoint stuff is mature enough to be
putting into DT either.

Rob