Hi everyone,
Following Abhishek comment and after some brainstorming within the team, we decided to rename the proposed "Property Access Layer (PAL)" to "Firmware CONfiguration Framework (fconf)".
Please let me know if this new name is more suitable, and less prone to confusion.
Regards, Louis
________________________________ From: Louis Mayencourt Louis.Mayencourt@arm.com Sent: 20 November 2019 13:50 To: Abhishek Pandit Abhishek.Pandit@arm.com; tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: Re: Design proposal: Property Access Layer
Hi Abhishek,
You're not the first one to mention the similarity with "platform abstraction layer", and I already heard people mixing the two. I will try to come with a better name. My current ideas are:
* PPAL: Platform Property Access Layer * PDAL: Platform Data Access/Abstraction Layer * ...
Any suggestion will be welcome !
Regards, Louis
________________________________ From: Abhishek Pandit Abhishek.Pandit@arm.com Sent: 20 November 2019 10:52 To: Louis Mayencourt Louis.Mayencourt@arm.com; tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: RE: Design proposal: Property Access Layer
Hi Louis,
The term PAL is also used for platform abstraction layer so it "could" be confusing to have this being used for something different.
Not necessarily suggesting to change anything but it might be worth considering this aspect.
Thanks, Abhishek
-----Original Message----- From: TF-A tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org On Behalf Of Louis Mayencourt via TF-A Sent: 19 November 2019 13:40 To: tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org Subject: [TF-A] Design proposal: Property Access Layer
Hi everyone,
Please let me introduce the `Property Access Layer` prototype:
The Property Access Layer (PAL) is an abstraction layer for platform specific data, allowing a "property" to be queried and a value retrieved without the requesting entity knowing what backing store is being used to hold the data. It is used to bridge new and old ways of providing platform-specific data: Today, information like the Chain of Trust is held within several, nested platform-defined tables. In the future, it may be provided as part of a device tree blob, along with the information about images to load. Introducing this abstraction layer will make migration easier and will preserve functionality for platforms that cannot / don't want to use device tree.
Please have a look at the patches: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/c/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a/+/2559/1
Regards, Louis
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. -- TF-A mailing list TF-A@lists.trustedfirmware.org https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tf-a IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.