From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755899AbdGXRzb (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:55:31 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:37595 "EHLO mail-wm0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755658AbdGXRwn (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jul 2017 13:52:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0aaba7fb-2183-2d4d-ba04-64b30cd0ae10@arm.com> References: <20170630095608.24943-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20170630095608.24943-2-andre.przywara@arm.com> <22d23c1d-ea8d-9829-4624-6305cd83ad4a@arm.com> <0aaba7fb-2183-2d4d-ba04-64b30cd0ae10@arm.com> From: Jassi Brar Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:22:41 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox To: Sudeep Holla Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9_Przywara?= , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com, Maxime Ripard , Chen-Yu Tsai , Icenowy Zheng , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Devicetree List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On 24/07/17 18:20, Jassi Brar wrote: >> >>> I see that the SCPI firmware driver (as the user of the mailbox API) is >>> expecting the return value from a0 as returned above, translating the >>> firmware error codes into Linux' ones. >>> >> I am afraid, SCPI driver is not the golden example for client drivers >> to follow. It is supposed to work only with MHU, and then, it is >> likely to break if some other protocol is running parallel to it. >> > > Not sure why do you say it works only with ARM MHU ? AmLogic uses it > with their mailbox driver. However they followed an interim version of > the SCPI spec which is termed "legacy" in the driver. > Screw coding... Just tell me what stuff do you smoke? Must be really good! From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jassi Brar Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:22:41 +0530 Message-ID: References: <20170630095608.24943-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20170630095608.24943-2-andre.przywara@arm.com> <22d23c1d-ea8d-9829-4624-6305cd83ad4a@arm.com> <0aaba7fb-2183-2d4d-ba04-64b30cd0ae10@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <0aaba7fb-2183-2d4d-ba04-64b30cd0ae10@arm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Mark Rutland , Devicetree List , =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9_Przywara?= , Chen-Yu Tsai , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com, Rob Herring , Icenowy Zheng , Maxime Ripard , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On 24/07/17 18:20, Jassi Brar wrote: >> >>> I see that the SCPI firmware driver (as the user of the mailbox API) is >>> expecting the return value from a0 as returned above, translating the >>> firmware error codes into Linux' ones. >>> >> I am afraid, SCPI driver is not the golden example for client drivers >> to follow. It is supposed to work only with MHU, and then, it is >> likely to break if some other protocol is running parallel to it. >> > > Not sure why do you say it works only with ARM MHU ? AmLogic uses it > with their mailbox driver. However they followed an interim version of > the SCPI spec which is termed "legacy" in the driver. > Screw coding... Just tell me what stuff do you smoke? Must be really good! From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jassisinghbrar@gmail.com (Jassi Brar) Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2017 23:22:41 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 1/8] mailbox: introduce ARM SMC based mailbox In-Reply-To: <0aaba7fb-2183-2d4d-ba04-64b30cd0ae10@arm.com> References: <20170630095608.24943-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20170630095608.24943-2-andre.przywara@arm.com> <22d23c1d-ea8d-9829-4624-6305cd83ad4a@arm.com> <0aaba7fb-2183-2d4d-ba04-64b30cd0ae10@arm.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:08 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On 24/07/17 18:20, Jassi Brar wrote: >> >>> I see that the SCPI firmware driver (as the user of the mailbox API) is >>> expecting the return value from a0 as returned above, translating the >>> firmware error codes into Linux' ones. >>> >> I am afraid, SCPI driver is not the golden example for client drivers >> to follow. It is supposed to work only with MHU, and then, it is >> likely to break if some other protocol is running parallel to it. >> > > Not sure why do you say it works only with ARM MHU ? AmLogic uses it > with their mailbox driver. However they followed an interim version of > the SCPI spec which is termed "legacy" in the driver. > Screw coding... Just tell me what stuff do you smoke? Must be really good!