On 12/03/18 23:07, Jolly Shah wrote: > Hi Sudeep, >>>> Do you foresee using SMC/HVC for this firmware even on future platforms? >>>> If not, I suggest to keep the protocol part separate from the transport i.e. >>>> smc/hvc via ATF. It could be replaced with mailbox or some h/w >>>> mechanism in future ? >>>> >>> >>> We have PSCI and EEMI interfaces exposed to linux from ATF. PSCI is an >>> EEMI client. We do not have current plans to switch to mailbox as it >>> will require 2 communication channels to PMU as PSCI is through ATF. >>> >> >> OK, but I just saw some bindings that has mailbox interface, honestly it's getting >> too confusing with multiple series on the same thing floating and hence I >> requested to put it together as one series. > > Mailbox binding is used for power management driver. Mailbox is only > used for PMU->APU communication. APU->PMU communication is always > through EEMI firmware interface which is using SMC/HVC. > Ah OK, is it because there's no non-secure mailbox or to avoid races, all non-secure EEMI is channeled through SMC ? -- Regards, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
