[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201106232046.35846.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:46:35 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: "Grosen, Mark" <mgrosen@...com>,
Michael Williamson <michael.williamson@...ticallink.com>,
"Ohad Ben-Cohen" <ohad@...ery.com>,
"davinci-linux-open-source"
<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Subhasish Ghosh <subhasish@...tralsolutions.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Introducing a generic AMP/IPC framework
On Thursday 23 June 2011 18:27:10 Grosen, Mark wrote:
> First, we are not abandoning DSPLINK. We have many users of this, even
> though it is out-of-tree, and we will continue to support it. That said, we
> do intend to make this new design the basis for DSPLINK-like
> functionality. It's designed to be done "the right way" for Linux (and we
> are looking for feedback to make it better). It is also designed to be more
> scalable and extensible in userspace. With a solid kernel foundation, we can
> provide lots of functionality in userspace, or users can implement their own
> custom solutions. One of the key things to do is map our existing DSPLINK
> APIs, like MessageQ, to the new rpmsg transport.
Sounds all good. What about the PRUSS code? Does that fit into the new model
as well?
Arnd
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists