Messages in this thread | | | From | Kevin Hilman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] firmware: Add support for TI System Control Interface (TI-SCI) protocol driver | Date | Thu, 08 Sep 2016 10:31:03 -0700 |
| |
Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:
> On 09/07/2016 01:55 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes: > > [...] full mail thread in https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/6/747 > >>> Overall architecture is very similar to SCPI[4] as follows: >> >> Dumb Q: I'm curious about the limitations in SCPI that were found that >> made TI decided to implement its own version.
[...]
> Long story short, investigation was done into what SCPI was providing > (TI internal ofcourse) and SCPI did not fit our SoC generation needs -
Thanks for the detailed explanation. Very helpful.
To be clear, I'm not a proponent of always using ARM "standards" (especially when it's not exactly clear if it's a standard or a Juno thing) but I'm seeing several SoCs come out with SCPI derivatives, or old ARM versions etc., so was just curious about the decision making process.
Thanks for sharing,
Kevin
| |