All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Sujeet Kumar Baranwal <sbaranwal@marvell.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: SCMI & Devfreq
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 17:58:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191014165832.GA323@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR18MB2438ADA20039CFF8F62DFF11AF9B0@BYAPR18MB2438.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 06:20:40PM +0000, Sujeet Kumar Baranwal wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> Per SCMI perf protocol, the MAX_OPPS macro which is 16, means that at max
> there could be only 16 OPPs. In my platform implementation, I tried with 16
> OPPs but  when OPPs info came linux perf.c file from SCP, it only showed 12
> OPPs only.
>
> Suspecting the rx buffer size, I increased the size to 256 and now the
> message for all 16 OPPs were reliably received.
>

OK, but is there any reason why firmware can't use num_levels[31:16]
i.e Number of remaining performance levels and [11:00] i.e.Number of
performance levels that are returned by this call to break and send in
2 calls ? The interface was designed to work with minimum shmem size.


> *****************
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> index 449f713..737d675 100644 (file)
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> @@ -612,7 +612,7 @@ int scmi_handle_put(const struct scmi_handle *handle)
>  static const struct scmi_desc scmi_generic_desc = {
>         .max_rx_timeout_ms = 30,        /* We may increase this if required */
>         .max_msg = 20,          /* Limited by MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN */
> -       .max_msg_size = 128,
> +       .max_msg_size = 256,

If you need this, I prefer to introduce new compatible for the platform
scmi and add it as platform specific scmi_desc to start with.

--
Regards,
Sudeep

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Sujeet Kumar Baranwal <sbaranwal@marvell.com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: SCMI & Devfreq
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 17:58:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191014165832.GA323@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR18MB2438ADA20039CFF8F62DFF11AF9B0@BYAPR18MB2438.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 06:20:40PM +0000, Sujeet Kumar Baranwal wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> Per SCMI perf protocol, the MAX_OPPS macro which is 16, means that at max
> there could be only 16 OPPs. In my platform implementation, I tried with 16
> OPPs but  when OPPs info came linux perf.c file from SCP, it only showed 12
> OPPs only.
>
> Suspecting the rx buffer size, I increased the size to 256 and now the
> message for all 16 OPPs were reliably received.
>

OK, but is there any reason why firmware can't use num_levels[31:16]
i.e Number of remaining performance levels and [11:00] i.e.Number of
performance levels that are returned by this call to break and send in
2 calls ? The interface was designed to work with minimum shmem size.


> *****************
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> index 449f713..737d675 100644 (file)
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> @@ -612,7 +612,7 @@ int scmi_handle_put(const struct scmi_handle *handle)
>  static const struct scmi_desc scmi_generic_desc = {
>         .max_rx_timeout_ms = 30,        /* We may increase this if required */
>         .max_msg = 20,          /* Limited by MBOX_TX_QUEUE_LEN */
> -       .max_msg_size = 128,
> +       .max_msg_size = 256,

If you need this, I prefer to introduce new compatible for the platform
scmi and add it as platform specific scmi_desc to start with.

--
Regards,
Sudeep

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-14 16:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <BYAPR18MB24387C9DDE32067F1763B6DEAFB00@BYAPR18MB2438.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
2019-09-13 10:23 ` SCMI & Devfreq Sudeep Holla
2019-09-16  5:22   ` [EXT] " Sujeet Kumar Baranwal
2019-09-16 10:15     ` Sudeep Holla
2019-09-16 17:36       ` Sujeet Kumar Baranwal
2019-09-18 22:53         ` Sujeet Kumar Baranwal
2019-09-19 15:23           ` Sudeep Holla
2019-09-19 15:23             ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-07 18:20             ` Sujeet Kumar Baranwal
2019-10-07 18:20               ` Sujeet Kumar Baranwal
2019-10-14 16:58               ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2019-10-14 16:58                 ` Sudeep Holla

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191014165832.GA323@bogus \
    --to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sbaranwal@marvell.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.