From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout06.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout06.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.221]) (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 5E0FB34321A; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:15:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.221 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775812511; cv=none; b=PROIq8Mqcf4e53xa0j/B8JDkzoEdA8UT5drm1fiJFl6lwU0B368uDAoI8YZIYPlOtbWaADvpZfss8xhB70gnznNCXAiEusDvHoodkjoKkUXIuj/uki8RtDvH41mBptJItdT+ooXrJZ6Uc1qE5KRLFkvbLm/bDzxSGCNjhN1ECGs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775812511; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JpJa58PoMonttvOLt93H63JO+wZyum3SsSQWwUbLqxk=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:CC:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=GFQsOlC7mPc9tnxMlCLUlCng/YS74Q45Ec4OFnCT9bEdAeTs6pb7O30SeVjR1UUy9QJylYJV0CTENg40UkOjwIPXBTaSeL5TTPzBURg37DiBzjaR3SCKOv4jSAAZyZHzvZuozfnpjhQJg2g9vFBnK1mIxWAuNSGJgpD9lX2hM3Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=h-partners.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=h-partners.com header.i=@h-partners.com header.b=cCNCogFy; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.221 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=h-partners.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=h-partners.com header.i=@h-partners.com header.b="cCNCogFy" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=h-partners.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=hiuHSJPUy25iXosBBBzHGzNPzJaExohOieP/SPCUJ9E=; b=cCNCogFyoEMDLJjkxhasTxsr0CJOI710rUJ/Bdich43SchhMHEeQIC57phcA9YN/+e4JenXC4 DpKhWii83+c9hiNYN+c+adFe+TPwNTvmcfCnREwuE6Ob5Y0BUen+/szV43V5M1FAFgnPlfCfT7z UGH6ax3sq1OVqVPE5Nz74cQ= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.104]) by canpmsgout06.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4fsWFG2HLvzRhTY; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 17:08:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggemv705-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [10.3.19.32]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 981B14048F; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 17:15:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) by dggemv705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 17:15:05 +0800 Received: from [10.67.121.59] (10.67.121.59) by kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.36; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 17:15:04 +0800 Message-ID: <750f63b0-2a66-4fe6-93fc-983cc5340a1c@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 17:15:03 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] mailbox: pcc: Mark Tx as complete in PCC IRQ handler From: "lihuisong (C)" To: Sudeep Holla , , CC: Adam Young , Robbie King , Jassi Brar , "Cristian Marussi" References: <20251016-pcc_mb_updates-v1-0-0fba69616f69@arm.com> <20251016-pcc_mb_updates-v1-4-0fba69616f69@arm.com> <7c351acf-aa0e-4e2e-89de-f296b3abd956@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <7c351acf-aa0e-4e2e-89de-f296b3abd956@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.17) To kwepemn100009.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.112) Hi Sudeep, On 10/20/2025 12:08 PM, lihuisong (C) wrote: > > 在 2025/10/17 3:08, Sudeep Holla 写道: >> The PCC IRQ handler clears channel-in-use and notifies clients with >> mbox_chan_received_data(), but it does not explicitly mark the >> transmit as complete. In IRQ completion mode this could leave Tx >> complete >> waiters hanging or lead to generic timeouts in the mailbox core. >> >> Invoke mbox_chan_txdone() in the IRQ path once the platform has >> acknowledged the transfer so the core can wake any waiters and update >> state accordingly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >>   drivers/mailbox/pcc.c | 1 + >>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c b/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c >> index 327e022973db..33bd2d05704b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c >> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c >> @@ -341,6 +341,7 @@ static irqreturn_t pcc_mbox_irq(int irq, void *p) >>        */ >>       pchan->chan_in_use = false; >>       mbox_chan_received_data(chan, NULL); >> +    mbox_chan_txdone(chan, 0); > Normally, this interface is called by mbox client. > So, IMO, this added code is not ok for mbox client. > AFAIS, this code should be for type4, right? > If so, the mbox client of type 4 channel has  responsibility to call > this interface. I found that this patch has been merged into master. The mbox_chan_txdone will be called twice in some mbox client drivers. Can you take a look at my above reply? Normally, the rx_callback is used to wake up waiter. /Huisong >>         pcc_chan_acknowledge(pchan); >> >