linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: OMAP2+: move mailbox.h out of plat-omap headers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2012 07:18:26 -0500
From:	Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.luna@...aro.org>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
	Juan Gutierrez <jgutierrez@...com>,
	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...ia.com>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: OMAP2+: move mailbox.h out of plat-omap headers

Tony,

On 29 October 2012 12:52, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/linux/platform_data/omap_mailbox.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
>
> This file should only contain pure platform data needed
> by the core omap code to pass to the mailbox driver.

Ok, looking at it closely, this header file is related to the API
itself, there is nothing that could be actually considered as pure
platform data, the structures are related with the mailbox framework
and even if I split this file into two, the additional header would
end up including the "platform_data" header unless I move
save/restore_ctx functions and then export them as symbols for the
API.

So, it might be better for the entire file to sit in
linux/include/mailbox/ then.

> The mailbox API header should be somewhere else,
> like include/linux/mailbox/mailbox-omap.h or similar.

Ok.

> But shouldn't this all now be handled by using the
> remoteproc framework?

Remoteproc doesn't handle the mailbox hardware directly, it still
relies in the mailbox framework for the low level communications.
E.g.: Proc1 has a message (virtqueue msg) queued to Proc2, uses
mailbox msg to generate an interrupt to Proc2, Proc2 queries the
message (virtqueue) based on the mailbox message received.

Regards,

Omar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/