From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@foss.st.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
<arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: fix voltage description in failure cases
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 16:16:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZqO9s9YzYjaCHSap@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240725065317.3758165-1-etienne.carriere@foss.st.com>
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 08:53:17AM +0200, Etienne Carriere wrote:
> Reset the reception buffer max size when a voltage domain description
> request fails, for example when the voltage domain returns an access
> permission error (SCMI_ERR_ACCESS) unless what only a single 32bit
> word is read back for the remaining voltage description requests
> responses leading to invalid information. The side effect of this
> issue is that the voltage regulators registered from those remaining
> SCMI voltage domain were assigned a wrong regulator name.
>
> Signed-off-by: Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@foss.st.com>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> index 2175ffd6cef5..f1a7c04ae820 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c
> @@ -229,8 +229,10 @@ static int scmi_voltage_descriptors_get(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph,
> /* Retrieve domain attributes at first ... */
> put_unaligned_le32(dom, td->tx.buf);
> /* Skip domain on comms error */
> - if (ph->xops->do_xfer(ph, td))
> + if (ph->xops->do_xfer(ph, td)) {
> + ph->xops->reset_rx_to_maxsz(ph, td);
I am fine with this to keep it simple, but thought I will check my thoughts.
We usually use reset_rx_to_maxsz in iterators as we don't know the expected
size of the response, whereas here it must be max sizeof(*resp_dom).
That said, we don't have any helpers and changing xfer->rx.len directly
doesn't looks good ? Or may be it is OK ? Thoughts ?
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-26 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-25 6:53 [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: fix voltage description in failure cases Etienne Carriere
2024-07-26 11:29 ` Cristian Marussi
2024-07-26 15:16 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2024-08-01 10:58 ` Cristian Marussi
2024-08-06 13:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2024-08-09 13:34 ` 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=ZqO9s9YzYjaCHSap@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=etienne.carriere@foss.st.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.