Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 Jan 2020 12:11:56 +0530 | From | Viresh Kumar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of transport type |
| |
On 10-01-20, 12:15, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:43 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> 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, some of the transport protocols getting discussed currently > > are SMC/HVC, SPCI (built on top of SMC/HVC), OPTEE based mailbox > > (similar to SPCI), and vitio based transport as alternative to mailbox. > > > > The transport protocols just need to provide struct scmi_desc, which > > also implements the struct scmi_transport_ops. > > > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> > > --- > > V2: > > - Dropped __iomem from payload data. > > Simply dropping the __iomem isn't much better, now you get other > type mismatches.
Right. So what exactly do you suggest I should do now? Drop __iomem from the structure's payload field but keep all local variables and function arguments with __iomem ?
> > - Moved transport ops to scmi_desc, and that has a per transport > > instance now which is differentiated using the compatible string. > > - Converted IS_ERR_OR_NULL to IS_ERR. > > These look good to me. > > > + * @payload: Transmit/Receive payload area > > + * @dev: Reference to device in the SCMI hierarchy corresponding to this > > + * channel > > + * @handle: Pointer to SCMI entity handle > > + * @transport_info: Transport layer related information > > + */ > > +struct scmi_chan_info { > > + void *payload; > > + struct device *dev; > > + struct scmi_handle *handle; > > + void *transport_info; > > +}; > > Maybe you can wrap the scmi_chan_info inside of another > structure that contains the payload pointer, and use container_of > to convert between them?
We don't need to convert between the two of them, isn't it ? Are you referring some other field here ?
> It's not obvious which parts of the structure should be shared and > which are transport specific.
All transport specific information is kept in the transport specific structure which is saved here in the transport_info field. Is there something else that isn't clear ?
-- viresh
| |