On 3/5/20 8:06 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 11:25:35AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote: > > [...] > >>> >>> Yes, this may fix the issue. However I would like to know if we need to support >>> multiple channels/shared memory simultaneously. It is fair requirement and >>> may need some work which should be fine. >> >> Do you have any suggestions? Currently I have not worked out an good >> solution. >> > > TBH, I haven't given it a much thought. I would like to know if people > are happy with just one SMC channel for SCMI or do they need more ? > If they need it, we can try to solve it. Otherwise, what you have will > suffice IMO. On our platforms we have one channel/shared memory area/mailbox instance for all standard SCMI protocols, and we have a separate channel/shared memory area/mailbox driver instance for a proprietary one. They happen to have difference throughput requirements, hence the split. If I read Peng's submission correctly, it seems to me that the usage model described before is still fine. -- Florian
