linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 0/2] drivers: clk: Add ZynqMP clock driver support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <DM2PR0201MB07675C4F818CEB58F78C838AB8170@DM2PR0201MB0767.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jan 2018 23:52:22 +0000
From:   Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
CC:     "mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        "sboyd@...eaurora.org" <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "michal.simek@...inx.com" <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 0/2] drivers: clk: Add ZynqMP clock driver support

Hi Sudeep,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sudeep Holla [mailto:sudeep.holla@....com]
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 3:47 AM
> To: Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com>; michal.simek@...inx.com; linux-
> clk@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>; mturquette@...libre.com;
> sboyd@...eaurora.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] drivers: clk: Add ZynqMP clock driver support
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/01/18 20:29, Jolly Shah wrote:
> > Hi Sudeep,
> >
> > There are 3 things:
> >
> > 1> IPI mailbox transport - series is already posted
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10145795/
> > 2> EEMI - Posted by me below
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10150665/
> > 3> EEMI Users
> > Currently posted as RFC as they are dependent on #2.
> > OK, can #2 and #3 can be put together until initial review ?
> 
> > #2 doesn’t use mailbox so it is a posted as a separate series.
> 
> OK, does it use smc ? If so, the point is treat it as smc mailbox so that smc is just
> a transport and EEMI can be still used with other transport technically.
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep


I am not sure if I get you correctly. 
Yes, EEMI uses SMC interface to communicate to PMU. Do you suggest to use Andre's SMC mailbox driver as transport for EEMI? 

Thanks,
Jolly Shah