[RFC PATCH 00/10] ratp: new generic RATP command support

[Sascha Hauer]

On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 05:43:40PM +0100, Aleksander Morgado wrote:
> >>
> >> The first patches (1-5) break the current RATP API, by introducing
> >> the concept of requests, responses and indications:
> >>  * Requests sent to one endpoint are expected to be replied with
> >>    a response by the peer endpoint.
> >>  * Indications are messages sent from one endpoint to another which
> >>    are not expected to be replied.
> >
> > I do not see why we have to break the RATP API. I mean currently we
> > have BB_RATP_TYPE_COMMAND and BB_RATP_TYPE_COMMAND_RETURN which you
> > convert to .type = BB_RATP_TYPE_COMMAND, .flags = 0 | RESPONSE.
> >
> > I see that using flags looks somewhat nicer, but besides of that,
> > what is your selling point to break the API?
> >
> 
> Well, it was just easier to say "if I send a request of type X, I
> expect back a response of the same type X". It avoids the need of
> having to define which command id is expected as response for which
> command id request.

Well right now the lowest bit the type field can serve this purpose,
i.e. "if I send a request of type X, I expect back a response type X + 1"

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |