From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754638AbcHSKjV (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 06:39:21 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:35179 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752581AbcHSKjT (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 06:39:19 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] scpi: Add vendor_send_message to enable access to vendor commands To: Neil Armstrong , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1471515066-3626-1-git-send-email-narmstrong@baylibre.com> <1471515066-3626-2-git-send-email-narmstrong@baylibre.com> <9bf4a979-5325-fd70-1887-04c605d593d8@baylibre.com> Cc: Sudeep Holla , linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, khilman@baylibre.com, heiko@sntech.de, wxt@rock-chips.com, frank.wang@rock-chips.com From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: <26c18a0c-ee62-3159-e10b-6b0e5c28fb56@arm.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:39:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9bf4a979-5325-fd70-1887-04c605d593d8@baylibre.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 19/08/16 09:00, Neil Armstrong wrote: > On 08/18/2016 05:53 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> >> On 18/08/16 11:10, Neil Armstrong wrote: >>> Adds an optional vendor_send_message to the scpi to enable sending >>> vendor platform specific commands to the SCP firmware. >>> >> >> I don't see any users of vendor_send_message in this series, so I prefer >> it to be dropped and introduced when required. >> >> Also I had a different view on how to introduce this[1]. I would rather >> wait until the requirement comes that enables us to make use of it. >> Looks like you took parts of it and introduces vendor_send_message >> allowing users to send any data which I don't like especially without >> knowing how will it be (ab)used. >> > > Hi Sudeep, > > Indeed, I won't ask you to merge patches 1, 8 and 9, they need refactoring and > a separate patchset. > Ah OK,then better if you put then at the end. Otherwise it makes it difficult to review. > Vendor commands are not necessary for Amlogic, this is a nice to have > since they have a "user" command that can be extended by a firmware > loaded by u-boot. > Good :) > Could you review the following patches and I'll post a reduced v2 > ASAP. > Yes I was doing that yesterday, sorry got distracted. I will continue today. -- Regards, Sudeep