Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] firmware: add support for ARM System Control and Power Interface(SCPI) protocol

From: Jassi Brar
Date: Wed Jul 29 2015 - 07:19:39 EST


On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 29/07/15 09:05, Jassi Brar wrote:
>
>>
>>> +static int scpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> + int count, idx, ret;
>>> + struct resource res;
>>> + struct scpi_chan *scpi_chan;
>>> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
>>> +
>>> + scpi_info = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*scpi_info), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!scpi_info)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + count = of_count_phandle_with_args(np, "mboxes", "#mbox-cells");
>>> + if (count < 0) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "no mboxes property in '%s'\n",
>>> np->full_name);
>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + scpi_chan = devm_kcalloc(dev, count, sizeof(*scpi_chan),
>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!scpi_chan)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + for (idx = 0; idx < count; idx++) {
>>> + resource_size_t size;
>>> + struct scpi_chan *pchan = scpi_chan + idx;
>>> + struct mbox_client *cl = &pchan->cl;
>>> + struct device_node *shmem = of_parse_phandle(np, "shmem",
>>> idx);
>>> +
>>> + if (of_address_to_resource(shmem, 0, &res)) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get SCPI payload mem
>>> resource\n");
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + goto err;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + size = resource_size(&res);
>>> + pchan->rx_payload = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, size);
>>> + if (!pchan->rx_payload) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to ioremap SCPI payload\n");
>>> + ret = -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
>>> + goto err;
>>> + }
>>> + pchan->tx_payload = pchan->rx_payload + (size >> 1);
>>> +
>>> + cl->dev = dev;
>>> + cl->rx_callback = scpi_handle_remote_msg;
>>> + cl->tx_prepare = scpi_tx_prepare;
>>> + cl->tx_block = true;
>>> + cl->tx_tout = 50;
>>> + cl->knows_txdone = false; /* controller can ack */
>>>
>> This is the cause of your problems that you think should be solved by
>> using hrtimer.
>>
>
> Ah sorry, it's stupid mistake on my part while writing the comment. It
> should have been controller can't ack, fixed locally now thanks for
> pointing it out.
>
No, I am talking about code, not the comment.

>> Controller may or may not (like MHU) set txdone_irq. However every
>> scpi command (struct scpi_ops members) is replied to as a response
>> packet reporting success or failure.
>
>
> No that's not true, I have already mentioned that couple of times in the
> other thread. It's just wrong comment here which went unnoticed from
> day#1, sorry for that.
>
>> So the client should set 'knows_txdone' to be true unless it is told
>> the controller on that platform supports txdone_irq (what you call
>> 'ack').
>>
> I got the concept but SCP can't ack via protocol, protocol has no such
> provision and it sets flags in MHU status register.
>
You either don't get the concept of TXDONE_BY_ACK or deliberately
overlook my point.

Assuming the former, let me explain. When a client receives a
response, it can be sure that the request has already been read by the
remote. If the protocol specifies every request has some response, the
client should assert 'knows_txdone' and call mbox_client_txdone() upon
receiving a reply packet.
So I said, cl->knows_txdone = false; is the root of problems you
report. If you fix that, the performance should be even better than
using hrtimer.

-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/