Re: [PATCHv10 2/4] mailbox: Introduce framework for mailbox

[Jassi Brar]

On 24 September 2014 09:14, Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 22 September 2014 14:33, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>>>>> +static void poll_txdone(unsigned long data)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +       struct mbox_controller *mbox = (struct mbox_controller *)data;
>>>>> +       bool txdone, resched = false;
>>>>> +       int i;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +       for (i = 0; i < mbox->num_chans; i++) {
>>>>> +               struct mbox_chan *chan = &mbox->chans[i];
>>>>> +
>>>>> +               if (chan->active_req && chan->cl) {
>>>>> +                       resched = true;
>>>>> +                       txdone = chan->mbox->ops->last_tx_done(chan);
>>>>> +                       if (txdone)
>>>>> +                               tx_tick(chan, 0);
>>>>> +               }
>>>>> +       }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +       if (resched)
>>>>> +               mod_timer(&mbox->poll, jiffies +
>>>>> +                               msecs_to_jiffies(mbox->period));
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While preparing a different patch which uses the Mbox framework, I
>>>> noticed that mbox->period might not be initialized anywhere. Also, how
>>>> is mbox->txpoll_period to be used? It appears from the description of
>>>> txpoll_period in mbox_controller.h that you'd want to use that value
>>>> in the mod_timer above, or equate the two somewhere in the controller
>>>> registration or eliminate one of the two. FWIW I also looked at your
>>>> code in [1].
>>>>
>>>
>>> IIUC the controller needs to set the txpoll_period if it sets
>>> txdone_poll, may be a sanity check for !0 would be good.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, sorry I confused mbox->period to txpoll_period.
>> You are right mbox->period is not set, the header claims it to be
>> private, and hence I assume it needs to be handled only in core mailbox
>> library. Not sure if we need both mbox->period and txpoll_period though.
>
> Right. I dont see the need for having both either. Unless the Mailbox
> maintainer wants to fix this in some other way, I can send a patch for
> replacing mbox->period with mbox->txpoll_period along with my PCC
> work.
>
Yeah, probably we should just get rid of mbox_controller.period  I
have updated the same in for-next.

Thanks
Jassi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/