linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] mailbox: hisilicon: add mailbox driver

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+yY1HTGNi4gZABNhXjpA57DPZx-tv=6+m4JLyx4wPHfovyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:32:05 +0530
From:	Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
To:	Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Wei Xu <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>,
	Bintian Wang <bintian.wang@...wei.com>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...aro.org>,
	Devicetree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Guodong Xu <guodong.xu@...aro.org>,
	Jian Zhang <zhangjian001@...ilicon.com>,
	Zhenwei Wang <Zhenwei.wang@...ilicon.com>,
	Haoju Mo <mohaoju@...ilicon.com>,
	Dan Zhao <dan.zhao@...ilicon.com>, kongfei@...ilicon.com,
	Guangyue Zeng <zengguangyue@...ilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] mailbox: hisilicon: add mailbox driver

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org> wrote:
> Hi Jassi,
>
> Thanks for review.
>
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 04:22:01PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> > For easily extending for Hisilicon series SoCs (SoCs may have difference
>> > for register's definition with each other), so firstly implement common
>> > mailbox driver; this common mailbox driver provides three mainly
>> > functionality:
>> >
>> >  - help register channels into framework;
>> >  - hook low level callback functions for register's operations;
>> >  - Enhance rx channel's message queue, which is based on the code in
>> >    drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c.
>> >
>> Not cool.
>>  Please don't reinvent the wheel by having platform specific
>> implementation of the mailbox api. Which vendor doesn't plan to roll
>> out new SoCs, and hence variations of mailbox controllers?  The OMAP
>> stack predates the common api, and was actually supposed to be
>> converted over eventually. Please implement just the
>> drivers/mailbox/hi6220-mailbox.c (preferably by the name of the
>> mailbox controller, if any)
>
> Understood. Here i have one question, the rx channel's message queue is
> looks like a common mechanism and can be added into framework file
> mailbox.c, then Soc driver file can _ONLY_ focus on register level's
> operations. If so, the common driver in this patch also is unnecessary.
>
Yes, that's what I say, no 'common' driver for a platform.

> Do you suggest to use upper method to rework patches? Or just think
> it's okay to implement rx channel's message queue in hi6220-mailbox.c?
>
The code in drivers/mailbox/ should only manage the controller
(registers and interrupts). Everything else (queues, shmem etc) should
be in platform specific client driver(s).
--
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/