Hi Will, On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 08:57:12AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Sudeep, > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 06:41:23PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: [...] > > > > Agreed, I added for RxTx buffers and initially to build the parent/child > > hierarchy for all users of the driver. Initially I was assuming only > > in-kernel users and now I agree we should avoid any in kernel users if > > possible. > > > > One thing to note FFA_PARTITION_INFO_GET relies on Rx buffers to send the > > information to the caller. So we need to have established buffers before > > that and one of the reason you don't find that in this RFC. I dropped that > > too which I wanted initially. > > Ok, sounds like we should at least get to a position where we can enumerate > things, though. > Yes. [...] > > > > OK, IIUC that covers mostly KVM implementation. We still need a way to > > share the RxTx buffer info to the partitions and DT/ACPI(?) is one > > possible way. Based on you comment about not needing DT node, do you have > > any other way to communicate the buffer info to the partitions ? > > This is only a concern if KVM chooses to provide the Rx/Tx buffer pair > though, right? If we punt that down the road for the moment, then we can > just rely on FFA_RXTX_MAP for now. > Ah OK, I was under the assumption that we didn't want to use FFA_RXTX_{,UN}MAP [...] > > > > I am confused a bit. When you refer drivers above, are you referring to > > drivers in host kernel(hypervisor) or in the partitions. I fail to > > imagine need for the former. > > I'm referring to in-kernel users in the host kernel. For KVM-managed guests, > we may not need these, although signalling things like system shutdown might > be better off done without relying on userspace. But my point is really that > separating the buffer management from the users means we can serialise > consumers, whether they are in-kernel or out in userspace. > Understood. > > > What do you think, and do you reckon you can spin a cut-down driver that > > > implements the common part of the logic (since I know you've written much > > > of this code already)? > > > > > > > I am not sure if I am aligned with your thoughts on the buffer sharing > > yet. > > Ok, please let me know if you have any more questions. > None ATM. As I mentioned I had ruled out RXTX_{,UN}MAP which was my misunderstanding. -- Regards, Sudeep