RE: [PATCH v8 3/4] gpio: rpmsg: add generic rpmsg GPIO driver

[Shenwei Wang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Baluta (OSS) <daniel.baluta@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 10:04 AM
> To: Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@xxxxxxx>; Bjorn Andersson
> <andersson@xxxxxxxxxx>; Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linusw@xxxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>; Bartosz
> Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; Rob Herring
> <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley
> <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx>; Frank Li
> <frank.li@xxxxxxx>; Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Shuah Khan
> <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>; Peng Fan
> <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> remoteproc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; Bartosz
> Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/4] gpio: rpmsg: add generic rpmsg GPIO driver
> 
> On 2/24/26 17:56, Shenwei Wang wrote:
> > Technically, yes—it's possible to use the virtio mechanism directly without
> rpmsg.
> > It’s a bit like talking straight to the IP layer without involving TCP
> > or UDP: doable, but at a lower‑level approach.
> >
> > As for the idea of gpio‑virtio, which could be an optional solution
> > that certain customers might prefer. I recall hearing this idea from
> > Mathieu originally, though I’m not sure whether he plans to implement it.
> 
> gpio-virtio is already upstream in drivers/gpio/gpio-virtio.c
> 

I’m not an expert on virtio, but having the gpio‑virtio driver upstream on the Linux side doesn’t 
necessarily mean the overall solution is complete. The remote firmware still needs to implement 
the virtio‑GPIO backend, expose the virtio‑GPIO device, and handle all of the underlying hardware 
interactions.

My understanding is that this firmware-side implementation is the part we were interested in.

Thanks,
Shenwei