From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6221E4D9FB for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 02:52:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730775133; cv=none; b=QxORW3X9mQmOFyuAQRNQRBO4aYtOIe7G6LYBTZP7MU8zkKInWm2VZeU4Tjn7LuGzV42MnwHvra+a0KMORpv+h1z9RTykTh4pREvWnBJv10iHq3JPW7mrnzoN4NCzWq7/IgAJazPmx00z9sViDBINL1hRECtvaYd7Y1SascChsiQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730775133; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1VpQKAl82BFbXCUscLrrcuWmm3n5bPL8FlaMQjbzFRk=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Ia863cDqTyr0zjDGS4ALCDr6/OdcPlvVNwRVGKRxtK+mBVnUM7a4tnpqPb0avN1jEA+FkOW4LOWx56YXOdRn7cl5FoDklIndeiU61hDU35tIiU+aKSlFyw4aKwss5lbojC+86J6k0WBC6b826syLJltSfRtm1nw5LP+48uFYhMU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=IIv/Boqg; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="IIv/Boqg" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1730775130; x=1762311130; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1VpQKAl82BFbXCUscLrrcuWmm3n5bPL8FlaMQjbzFRk=; b=IIv/BoqgTMuyW61NvEiBYJJ/v31nf/EOi51otqnntMigStKKBH3GkMcT NjG72rDBkaD3thOQIow6gnD996R6fEC3gq/79a45Bm/heyYR9gCV19PYu oBwncC+ZUg78yzwm/TgGkt2dBAsuc31IWBKprc7HCiipi18IDVMJ+AHn3 yUxETIHUCeRtf7AdSJ39hcqIEloRvfqiegLa6mLPl1dzeZ8DSMxY0D5zV DK1g5B366gvxn+n0LreUoFgsZTXm9AVuQJOqziynKWICNblFaV/DFZ61C EgMUFUsQ4574//Wz7P4qvem/GThfZbJxTm5GI7Gc8HCU8EVbVO0aTFVFP A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 0/A99QbMQCCPuIJSr7JnEQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: yZqRunh/RqaSFEy0MZIfzA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11222"; a="30452384" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,199,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="30452384" Received: from fmviesa001.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.141]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Nov 2024 18:52:10 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: LwfHfSlaT92UkqzsjIRNXg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: NJLxmLyiQtqNWb+73NDp/A== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,258,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="114644994" Received: from ipu5-build.bj.intel.com (HELO [10.238.232.136]) ([10.238.232.136]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Nov 2024 18:50:05 -0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] media: intel/ipu6: remove buttress ish structure To: Stanislaw Gruszka Cc: Sakari Ailus , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Bingbu Cao References: <20241031130622.430308-1-stanislaw.gruszka@linux.intel.com> <2251d433-ecf0-6300-3598-82438befb456@linux.intel.com> <34bb5ca1-8c7c-316e-5886-378c8660f7f1@linux.intel.com> <7ad30743-58c5-7004-9eed-4f1d8589c7f7@linux.intel.com> From: Bingbu Cao Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 10:47:03 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/4/24 5:19 PM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 05:07:25PM +0800, Bingbu Cao wrote: >> >> On 11/1/24 4:19 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote: >>> Hi Bingbu, >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 03:47:54PM +0800, Bingbu Cao wrote: >>>> Sakari and Stanislaw, >>>> >>>> On 11/1/24 3:46 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote: >>>>>>>> @@ -386,10 +382,8 @@ irqreturn_t ipu6_buttress_isr(int irq, void *isp_ptr) >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> if (irq_status & BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING) { >>>>>>>> - dev_dbg(&isp->pdev->dev, >>>>>>>> - "BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING\n"); >>>>>>>> - ipu6_buttress_ipc_recv(isp, &b->ish, &b->ish.recv_data); >>>>>>>> - complete(&b->ish.recv_complete); >>>>>>>> + dev_warn(&isp->pdev->dev, >>>>>>>> + "BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING\n"); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think this is a unrelated change, right? >>>>>> >>>>>> I mean the change from dev_dbg() to dev_warn(). >>>>> >>>>> We're not handling these interrupts anymore in any way. >>>>> >>>>> I wonder if the ipu6_buttress_ipc_recv() call should still remain in place, >>>>> even if we really do nothing with these. It looks like some kind of an >>>>> acknowledgement mechanism. >>>> >>>> I just confirm that IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING and IPC_EXEC_DONE_BY_ISH are >>>> not valid anymore from IPU6, I think the handling here and below could be >>>> removed. >>> >>> Do you know which IPU version still needed it? >>> >>> There are folks who'd like to add IPU4 support to the driver but they can >>> add it back if it's needed. >>> >> >> I know that ISH IPC was added from IPU4, but I am not sure IPU4 really >> need that now. > > Ok, I think on v3, I'll remove handling of BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_FROM_ISH_IS_WAITING > and BUTTRESS_ISR_IPC_EXEC_DONE_BY_ISH from isr, but will keep the BIT's > definitions just in case. Thanks! > > Regards > Stanislaw > -- Best regards, Bingbu Cao