On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 04:31:52PM +0000, Shenwei Wang wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 7:42 AM
> > To: Shenwei Wang <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>; Bjorn Andersson
> > <[email protected]>; Mathieu Poirier <[email protected]>; Rob
> > Herring <[email protected]>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>; Conor
> > Dooley <[email protected]>; Shawn Guo <[email protected]>; Sascha
> > Hauer <[email protected]>; Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]>; Bartosz
> > Golaszewski <[email protected]>; Pengutronix Kernel Team
> > <[email protected]>; Fabio Estevam <[email protected]>; Peng Fan
> > <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; linux-arm-
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; linux-
> > [email protected]; dl-linux-imx <[email protected]>
> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] docs: staging: gpio-rpmsg: gpio over
> > rpmsg bus
> >
> > Since this has not been merged yet, there are no existing systems.
> >
>
> In this context, "system" refers to both Linux and the remote firmware. The
> remote firmware
> for i.MX platforms has already been released and widely used by our
> customers. Maintaining
> compatibility with the existing firmware would provide a better solution for
> customers.
>From what i understand, this is not just GPIO. There is also I2C? And
RTC? I would expect a generic implementation of these as well? I find
it unlikely you can persuade all these subsystem Maintainers to accept
your protocols as is. You need to make changes so that GPIOs
interrupts work correctly, so i would just accept you need to change
the firmware. And i've given you a way you can keep backwards
compatible to your out of tree driver...
Andrew
