search for: rpmsg_devic

...ver. This patch adds a vhost-based RPMsg > > > server implementation. > > > > This looks really useful, but why is it implemented as an API and not as > > a real vhost driver which implements an rpmsg bus? If you implement it > > as a vhost driver which implements rpmsg_device_ops and > > rpmsg_endpoint_ops, then wouldn't you be able to implement your > > vhost-sof driver using the normal rpmsg APIs? > > Sorry, not sure what you mean by the "normal rpmsg API?" Do you mean the > VirtIO RPMsg API? But that's the opposite side of th...

...ver. This patch adds a vhost-based RPMsg > > > server implementation. > > > > This looks really useful, but why is it implemented as an API and not as > > a real vhost driver which implements an rpmsg bus? If you implement it > > as a vhost driver which implements rpmsg_device_ops and > > rpmsg_endpoint_ops, then wouldn't you be able to implement your > > vhost-sof driver using the normal rpmsg APIs? > > Sorry, not sure what you mean by the "normal rpmsg API?" Do you mean the > VirtIO RPMsg API? But that's the opposite side of th...

...ost-based RPMsg > > > > server implementation. > > > > > > This looks really useful, but why is it implemented as an API and not as > > > a real vhost driver which implements an rpmsg bus? If you implement it > > > as a vhost driver which implements rpmsg_device_ops and > > > rpmsg_endpoint_ops, then wouldn't you be able to implement your > > > vhost-sof driver using the normal rpmsg APIs? > > > > Sorry, not sure what you mean by the "normal rpmsg API?" Do you mean the > > VirtIO RPMsg API? But that'...

...irtIO clients and > no support for a VirtIO server. This patch adds a vhost-based RPMsg > server implementation. This looks really useful, but why is it implemented as an API and not as a real vhost driver which implements an rpmsg bus? If you implement it as a vhost driver which implements rpmsg_device_ops and rpmsg_endpoint_ops, then wouldn't you be able to implement your vhost-sof driver using the normal rpmsg APIs? I tried quickly hooking up this code to such a vhost driver and I was able to communicate between host and guest systems with both rpmsg-client-sample and rpmsg-char which alm...

...irtIO clients and > no support for a VirtIO server. This patch adds a vhost-based RPMsg > server implementation. This looks really useful, but why is it implemented as an API and not as a real vhost driver which implements an rpmsg bus? If you implement it as a vhost driver which implements rpmsg_device_ops and rpmsg_endpoint_ops, then wouldn't you be able to implement your vhost-sof driver using the normal rpmsg APIs? I tried quickly hooking up this code to such a vhost driver and I was able to communicate between host and guest systems with both rpmsg-client-sample and rpmsg-char which alm...

...failure. > > > > :: > > > > - struct rpmsg_endpoint *rpmsg_create_ept(struct rpmsg_channel *rpdev, > > - void (*cb)(struct rpmsg_channel *, void *, int, void *, u32), > > - void *priv, u32 addr); > > + struct rpmsg_endpoint *rpmsg_create_ept(struct rpmsg_device *rpdev, > > + rpmsg_rx_cb_t cb, void *priv, > > + struct rpmsg_channel_info chinfo); > > Again I don't see this being used in this set... It should have been sent on > its own to the remoteproc and documentation mailing list. Note that > Documentation/rpm...

RPMsg uses dma_alloc_coherent() to allocate memory to shared with the remote. In this case, as there is no pages setup in the dma_alloc_coherent(), we cannot get the physical address back from the virtual address, and thus, we can set the sg_dma_addr to store the DMA address and mark it already DMA mapped. When virtio vring sees the sg_dma_addr is ready set, do not call dma_map_page(). The issue

RPMsg uses dma_alloc_coherent() to allocate memory to shared with the remote. In this case, as there is no pages setup in the dma_alloc_coherent(), we cannot get the physical address back from the virtual address, and thus, we can set the sg_dma_addr to store the DMA address and mark it already DMA mapped. When virtio vring sees the sg_dma_addr is ready set, do not call dma_map_page(). The issue

RPMsg uses dma_alloc_coherent() to allocate memory to shared with the remote. In this case, as there is no pages setup in the dma_alloc_coherent(), we cannot get the physical address back from the virtual address, and thus, we can set the sg_dma_addr to store the DMA address and mark it already DMA mapped. When virtio vring sees the sg_dma_addr is ready set, do not call dma_map_page(). The issue

RPMsg uses dma_alloc_coherent() to allocate memory to shared with the remote. In this case, as there is no pages setup in the dma_alloc_coherent(), we cannot get the physical address back from the virtual address, and thus, we can set the sg_dma_addr to store the DMA address and mark it already DMA mapped. When virtio vring sees the sg_dma_addr is ready set, do not call dma_map_page(). The issue

RPMsg uses dma_alloc_coherent() to allocate memory to shared with the remote. In this case, as there is no pages setup in the dma_alloc_coherent(), we cannot get the physical address back from the virtual address, and thus, we can set the sg_dma_addr to store the DMA address and mark it already DMA mapped. When virtio vring sees the sg_dma_addr is ready set, do not call dma_map_page(). The issue

RPMsg uses dma_alloc_coherent() to allocate memory to shared with the remote. In this case, as there is no pages setup in the dma_alloc_coherent(), we cannot get the physical address back from the virtual address, and thus, we can set the sg_dma_addr to store the DMA address and mark it already DMA mapped. When virtio vring sees the sg_dma_addr is ready set, do not call dma_map_page(). The issue

This patch set is a follow up to "Add a vhost RPMsg API" [1], it is marked as an RFC because firstly it depends on the RPMsg API series and secondly it is currently being reviewed on ALSA and SOF mailing lists, but any early comments from virtualisation developers would be highly appreciated too! Thanks Guennadi [1]

This patch set is a follow up to "Add a vhost RPMsg API" [1], it is marked as an RFC because firstly it depends on the RPMsg API series and secondly it is currently being reviewed on ALSA and SOF mailing lists, but any early comments from virtualisation developers would be highly appreciated too! Thanks Guennadi [1]

Hi, Next update: v5: - don't hard-code message layout v4: - add endianness conversions to comply with the VirtIO standard v3: - address several checkpatch warnings - address comments from Mathieu Poirier v2: - update patch #5 with a correct vhost_dev_init() prototype - drop patch #6 - it depends on a different patch, that is currently an RFC - address comments from Pierre-Louis Bossart:

Hi, Next update: v5: - don't hard-code message layout v4: - add endianness conversions to comply with the VirtIO standard v3: - address several checkpatch warnings - address comments from Mathieu Poirier v2: - update patch #5 with a correct vhost_dev_init() prototype - drop patch #6 - it depends on a different patch, that is currently an RFC - address comments from Pierre-Louis Bossart:

v3: - address several checkpatch warnings - address comments from Mathieu Poirier v2: - update patch #5 with a correct vhost_dev_init() prototype - drop patch #6 - it depends on a different patch, that is currently an RFC - address comments from Pierre-Louis Bossart: * remove "default n" from Kconfig Linux supports RPMsg over VirtIO for "remote processor" /AMP use cases.

v3: - address several checkpatch warnings - address comments from Mathieu Poirier v2: - update patch #5 with a correct vhost_dev_init() prototype - drop patch #6 - it depends on a different patch, that is currently an RFC - address comments from Pierre-Louis Bossart: * remove "default n" from Kconfig Linux supports RPMsg over VirtIO for "remote processor" /AMP use cases.

Hi, Next update: v6: - rename include/linux/virtio_rpmsg.h -> include/linux/rpmsg/virtio.h v5: - don't hard-code message layout v4: - add endianness conversions to comply with the VirtIO standard v3: - address several checkpatch warnings - address comments from Mathieu Poirier v2: - update patch #5 with a correct vhost_dev_init() prototype - drop patch #6 - it depends on a different

Hi, Next update: v6: - rename include/linux/virtio_rpmsg.h -> include/linux/rpmsg/virtio.h v5: - don't hard-code message layout v4: - add endianness conversions to comply with the VirtIO standard v3: - address several checkpatch warnings - address comments from Mathieu Poirier v2: - update patch #5 with a correct vhost_dev_init() prototype - drop patch #6 - it depends on a different