linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of transport type

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: <20191210101851.gpayo7bnyf54opyu@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:48:51 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc:     Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Make scmi core independent of
 transport type

On 03-12-19, 12:00, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> I am more interested in this part. As I am aware the only 2 other
> transport being discussed is SMC/HVC and new/yet conceptual SPCI(built
> on top of SMC/HVC). There are already discussions on the list to make
> former as mailbox[1]. While I see both pros and cons with that approach,
> there's a need to converge. One main advantage I see with SMC/HVC mailbox
> is that it can be used with any other client and not just SCMI. Equally,
> the queuing in the mailbox may not be needed with fast SMC/HVC but may
> be needed for new SPCI(not yet fully analysed).
 
We were also looking for OPTEE based mailbox which is similar to SPCI.

-- 
viresh