linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] mailbox: arm_mhu: add support to use in doorbell mode

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: <20190605194636.GW2456@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jun 2019 20:46:36 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc:     Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mailbox: arm_mhu: add support to use in doorbell mode

On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 10:44:24AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 08:39:46PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> 
> > It feels like the issues with sharing access to the hardware and with the
> > API for talking to doorbell hardware are getting tied together and
> > confusing things.  But like I say I might be missing something here.

...

> So what I am trying to convey here is MHU controller hardware can be
> used choosing one of the  different transport protocols available and
> that's platform choice based on the use-case.

> The driver in the kernel should identify the same from the firmware/DT
> and configure it appropriately.

> It may get inefficient and sometime impossible to address all use-case
> if we stick to one transport protocol in the driver and try to build
> an abstraction on top to use in different transport mode.

Right, what I was trying to get at was that it feels like the discussion
is getting wrapped up in the specifics of the MHU rather than
representing this sort of controller with multiple modes in the
framework.  It's important for establishing the use case but ultimately
a separate issue.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)