[alsa-devel] [v4,00/14] ASoC: Sound Open Firmware (SOF) core

[Xiang Xiao]

Should we utilize official IPC frameowrk instead reinverting the wheel?
1.Load firmware by drivers/remoteproc
  https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/remoteproc.txt
2.Do the comunication through drivers/rpmsg
  https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/rpmsg.txt
Many vendor(TI, Qualcomm, ST, NXP, Xilinx...) migrate to remoteproc/rpmsg, why Intel provide an other IPC mechanism?
Actually, remoteproc/rpmsg is much better than SOF IPC because:
1.Completely isolate the firmware load and message transfer:
  The same rpmsg driver could run on any remote processor
2.Separate the application protocol from transfer layer:
  One remote processor could host many rpmsg services
3.Completely follow kernel driver model(rpsmg_bus, rpmsg_device and rpmsg_driver).
4.Support by many RTOS(Bare Metal, FreeRTOS, Zephyr, NuttX, Nucleus, uC/OS...) for remote side:
  https://github.com/OpenAMP/open-amp
  https://github.com/NXPmicro/rpmsg-lite
5.Maintained by the standard committee:
  https://www.multicore-association.org/workgroup/oamp.php
  https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=virtio
Since the keypoint of SOF is the platform agnostic and modular, please use the standard technique here.

Thanks
Xiang