Re: [PATCHv5 2/4] mailbox: Introduce framework for mailbox

[Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1162 bytes --]

On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 07:12:05AM -0400, Matt Porter wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 03:51:55PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:

> > BTW, here we at least have a hardware resource to specify in the DT
> > node, there are examples in kernel where the DT nodes are purely
> > virtual. For ex, grep for "linux,spdif-dit". So I think we should be
> > ok.

> There's a bit of a difference between my concern over a virtual node and
> this example you've cited. In the dummy spdif transmitter, it's defining
> a virtual device that plugs in for a codec, a hardware concept well
> defined in the audio bindings. I agree that there are many examples of
> this type of virtual node, including dummy phys, but in all cases they
> are stubbing out a real hardware concept.

Well, really it's an actual physical thing - it's something that appears
in the schematic and can be pointed at on the board but just doesn't
have software control.  From that point of view if the software that's
being interacted with on the remote processor is in ROM/flash which
won't or can't be realistically be updated (which seems to be mostly the
case) then you can reasonably say the same thing.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]