linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: exynos: added mailbox node

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]

Message-ID: <CABb+yY1rvozkGS34CHt8YEJqvGRXuHV09=AdS3=zQBx=DjFDCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Mar 2014 21:39:56 +0530
From:	Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Girish K S <ks.giri@...sung.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>, Ilho Lee <ilho215.lee@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: exynos: added mailbox node

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Monday 17 March 2014, Jassi Brar wrote:

>>   Perhaps the mailbox controller driver should name its links as it
>> wants. By how the remote works with the mailbox links, the client
>> driver asks for a specific mailbox link (which maybe a hardcoded
>> string in the driver or be gotten alongside other data via client's
>> DT) ?
>
> I don't see why we should do it any different from the other bindings.
> Let's just stick with mboxes/mbox-names or mailboxes/mailbox-names
> if you prefer.
>
>>   IOW we can't have a generic API/DT-bindings that could get us
>> reusable client drivers. But only common framework/code that would
>> otherwise be duplicated by every platform.
>
> That is a major benefit though.
> Also even if most drivers won't work across multiple platforms, there
> is still a reasonable chance that /some/ drivers will.
>
It seems those /some/ drivers will have to work with everything same
but the channel name (which the client could get from its DT node when
the second platform appears).

Anyways, I accept your opinion and I will specify DT binding for
mailbox<->client in next revision.

Also I just read the new requirement of 'peek_message' for QMTM
driver, which isn't supported atm but should be easy.

Thanks
-Jassi
--
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/