On 06/10/17 14:47, Jassi Brar wrote: > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On 06/10/17 12:26, Jassi Brar wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> This patch adds ARM MHU specific mailbox interface for SCMI. >>>>> >>>>> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> This clearly needs an explanation why we need another driver. >>>> >>> Yes the patch needs explanation which is that we need a shim layer to >>> map SCMI requests onto what the underlying controller expects. The >>> alternative was to clone the controller driver (MHU now and others >>> later when their platforms support SCMI) and pretend SCMI is the only >>> client they are ever going to serve. >>> >> >> Again that's not the point, doorbell is more common feature and that can >> be supported. As SCMI expects doorbell feature in the specification, it >> just need to support that class of controllers. >> > NO. All SCMI expects is SHMEM and a signal reaching the other end. > The signal mechanism need not necessarily be "doorbell". >
Agreed, but creating an abstraction ro do something as generic as doorbell and writing shim layer for each controller to use SCMI also sounds bad. -- Regards, Sudeep
