Re: [PATCH 2/2] slimbus: ngd: add stream support

[Srinivas Kandagatla]

Thanks Vinod for review.

On 25/06/18 05:43, Vinod wrote:
> On 21-06-18, 14:40, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>
> > +	if (txn->mt == SLIM_MSG_MT_CORE &&
> > +		(txn->mc == SLIM_MSG_MC_CONNECT_SOURCE ||
> > +		txn->mc == SLIM_MSG_MC_CONNECT_SINK ||
> > +		txn->mc == SLIM_MSG_MC_DISCONNECT_PORT)) {
> > +
> > +		txn->mt = SLIM_MSG_MT_DEST_REFERRED_USER;
> > +		if (txn->mc == SLIM_MSG_MC_CONNECT_SOURCE)
> > +			txn->mc = SLIM_USR_MC_CONNECT_SRC;
> > +		else if (txn->mc == SLIM_MSG_MC_CONNECT_SINK)
> > +			txn->mc = SLIM_USR_MC_CONNECT_SINK;
> > +		else if (txn->mc == SLIM_MSG_MC_DISCONNECT_PORT)
> > +			txn->mc = SLIM_USR_MC_DISCONNECT_PORT;
>
> How about a switch case for this
Will give that a go.
> > +		i = 0;
> > +		wbuf[i++] = txn->la;
> > +		la = SLIM_LA_MGR;
> > +		wbuf[i++] = txn->msg->wbuf[0];
> > +		if (txn->mc != SLIM_USR_MC_DISCONNECT_PORT)
> > +			wbuf[i++] = txn->msg->wbuf[1];
> > +
> > +		txn->comp = &done;
> > +		ret = slim_alloc_txn_tid(sctrl, txn);
> > +		if (ret) {
> > +			dev_err(ctrl->dev, "Unable to allocate TID\n");
> > +			return ret;
> > +		}
> > +
> > +		wbuf[i++] = txn->tid;
> > +
> > +		txn->msg->num_bytes = i;
> > +		txn->msg->wbuf = wbuf;
> > +		txn->msg->rbuf = rbuf;
> > +		txn->rl = txn->msg->num_bytes + 4;
> > +	}
> > +
> >   	/* HW expects length field to be excluded */
> >   	txn->rl--;
> >   	puc = (u8 *)pbuf;
> > @@ -830,6 +869,19 @@ static int qcom_slim_ngd_xfer_msg(struct slim_controller *sctrl,
> >   		return -ETIMEDOUT;
> >   	}
> >   
> > +	if (txn->mt == SLIM_MSG_MT_DEST_REFERRED_USER &&
> > +		(txn->mc == SLIM_USR_MC_CONNECT_SRC ||
> > +		 txn->mc == SLIM_USR_MC_CONNECT_SINK ||
> > +		 txn->mc == SLIM_USR_MC_DISCONNECT_PORT)) {
>
> how about precalculate this check and use:
>          bool something = txn->mt == SLIM_MSG_MT_DEST_REFERRED_USER &&
>                                txn->mc == SLIM_USR_MC_CONNECT_SRC ||
>                                txn->mc == SLIM_USR_MC_CONNECT_SINK ||
>                                txn->mc == SLIM_USR_MC_DISCONNECT_PORT;
>
> and then use in this case and previous one, make code better to read
Yep. Will do.
>          if (something) {
> > +		timeout = wait_for_completion_timeout(&done, HZ);
> > +		if (!timeout) {
> > +			dev_err(sctrl->dev, "TX timed out:MC:0x%x,mt:0x%x",
> > +				txn->mc, txn->mt);
> > +			return -ETIMEDOUT;
> > +		}
> > +
> > +	}
> > +
>
> [...]
>
> > +		struct slim_port *port = &rt->ports[i];
> > +
> > +		if (txn.msg->num_bytes == 0) {
> > +			int seg_interval = SLIM_SLOTS_PER_SUPERFRAME/rt->ratem;
> > +			int exp;
> > +
> > +			wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes++] = sdev->laddr;
> > +			wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes] = rt->bps >> 2 |
> > +						   (port->ch.aux_fmt << 6);
> > +
> > +			/* Data channel segment interval not multiple of 3 */
> > +			exp = seg_interval % 3;
> > +			if (exp)
> > +				wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes] |= BIT(5);
> > +
> > +			txn.msg->num_bytes++;
> > +			wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes++] = exp << 4 | rt->prot;
> > +
> > +			if (rt->prot == SLIM_PROTO_ISO)
> > +				wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes++] =
> > +						port->ch.prrate |
> > +						SLIM_CHANNEL_CONTENT_FL;
> > +			else
> > +				wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes++] =  port->ch.prrate;
> > +
> > +			ret = slim_alloc_txn_tid(ctrl, &txn);
> > +			if (ret) {
> > +				dev_err(&sdev->dev, "Fail to allocate TID\n");
> > +				return -ENXIO;
> > +			}
> > +			wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes++] = txn.tid;
> > +		}
> > +		wbuf[txn.msg->num_bytes++] = port->ch.id;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	txn.mc = SLIM_USR_MC_DEF_ACT_CHAN;
> > +	txn.rl = txn.msg->num_bytes + 4;
> > +	ret = qcom_slim_ngd_xfer_msg_sync(ctrl, &txn);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		slim_free_txn_tid(ctrl, &txn);
> > +		dev_err(&sdev->dev, "TX timed out:MC:0x%x,mt:0x%x", txn.mc,
> > +				txn.mt);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	txn.mc = SLIM_USR_MC_RECONFIG_NOW;
> > +	txn.msg->num_bytes = 2;
> > +	wbuf[1] = sdev->laddr;
> > +	txn.rl = txn.msg->num_bytes + 4;
> > +
> > +	ret = slim_alloc_txn_tid(ctrl, &txn);
> > +	if (ret) {
>
> what about tid allocated in previous loop.. they are not freed here on
> error and seems to be overwritten by this allocation.
Successful transaction tids will be freed once we receive response to 
that message.

In this error case we failed to allocate TID, but the last transaction 
has been submitted successfully, so I tid to be released once we get 
response for the previous message.

thanks,
srini
>