[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZrIhR-bpbkwdK3Mx@bogus>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 14:12:39 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org, james.quinlan@...adcom.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
etienne.carriere@...com, peng.fan@....nxp.com, michal.simek@....com,
quic_sibis@...cinc.com, quic_nkela@...cinc.com, ptosi@...gle.com,
dan.carpenter@...aro.org, souvik.chakravarty@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] firmware: arm_scmi: Make MBOX transport a
standalone driver
On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 02:33:14PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> Make SCMI mailbox transport a standalne driver that can be optionally
> loaded as a module.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
> ---
> v2 --> v3
> - fixed spacing in Kconfig
> - updated Copyright
> - use new params in DEFINE_SCMI_TRANSPORT_DRIVER
> ---
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Kconfig | 4 +-
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile | 3 +-
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 3 --
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 3 --
> .../{mailbox.c => scmi_transport_mailbox.c} | 47 +++++++++++++------
> 5 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> rename drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/{mailbox.c => scmi_transport_mailbox.c} (87%)
I am happy with the changes in the series, they all look good. I wonder if
it makes sense to move transport drivers into a separate folder
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/transport/{mailbox,smc,optee,virtio}.c
In scmi_transport_*.c, I see scmi is redundant and transport can be eliminated
by moving all under the folder with that name. Thoughts ?
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists