Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] scpi: Add SCPI framework to handle vendors variants

[Sudeep Holla]

On 01/06/16 17:30, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> [ + Heiko, who may know about the Rockchip implementation ]
>
> Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On 30/05/16 09:30, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> > > On 05/27/2016 10:17 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > > While looking for other ARMv8 based platform, I found that the RK3368
> > > platform has the same SCPI implementation as Amlogic.
> > >
> > > They extended it with DDR, system and thermal commands.
> > >
> > > Look at :
> > > https://github.com/geekboxzone/mmallow_kernel/blob/geekbox/drivers/mailbox/scpi_cmd.h
> > >
> > > https://github.com/geekboxzone/mmallow_kernel/blob/geekbox/drivers/mailbox/scpi_protocol.c
> >
> >
> > > So the SCPI must have a framework to allow different protocol
> > > versions, and must allow command extension. Grouping Rockchip and
> > > Amlogic should be done, thus needing a generic name like vendor_scpi
> > > or with a version.
> >
> > Makes sense. I understand the need to reuse and I need a bit of time to
> > have a look at the code(both Amlogic one's you have pointed out and the
> > Rockchip one) in detail to see what's the best way to proceed. I will
> > have a look at this later this week and get back to you.
> >
> > > Sudeep, could you somehow find out which version of the protocol
> > > AmLogic and Rockchip based their SCPI development ?
> >
> > Yes I tried checking with Rockchip but didn't get a response. But my
> > guess is that it was some preliminary unpublished version of SCPI
> > unfortunately :(
>
> And if one partner did that, probably everyone else did as well, but
> this being the ARM universe, they all did it slightly differently. :(

No doubt :)

> We know from experience, that this happens all the time in the absence
> of a clear standard, so this framework will need to be extended to be
> useful.

Completely agreed, better to gather all the information possible before
we proceed. I will try to check if I can get hold of old version
internally in the meantime.

--
Regards,
Sudeep