From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, james.quinlan@broadcom.com,
Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
etienne.carriere@linaro.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
souvik.chakravarty@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Reset properly xfer SCMI status
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 19:01:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210607180137.GB40811@e120937-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210607173809.et6fzayvubsosvso@bogus>
On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 06:38:09PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 11:12:23PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > When an SCMI command transfer fails due to some protocol issue an SCMI
> > error code is reported inside the SCMI message payload itself and it is
> > then retrieved and transcribed by the specific transport layer into the
> > xfer.hdr.status field by transport specific .fetch_response().
> >
> > The core SCMI transport layer never explicitly reset xfer.hdr.status,
> > so when an xfer is reused, if a transport misbehaved in handling such
> > status field, we risk to see an invalid ghost error code.
> >
> > Reset xfer.hdr.status to SCMI_SUCCESS right before each transfer is
> > started.
> >
>
> Any particular reason why it can't be part of xfer_get_init which has other
> initialisations ? If none, please move it there.
>
Well it was there initially then I moved it here.
The reason is mostly the same as the reason for the other patch in this
series that adds a reinit_completion() in this same point: the core does
not forbid to reuse an xfer multiple times, once obtained with xfer_get()
or xfer_get_init(), and indeed some protocols do such a thing: they
implements such do_xfer looping and bails out on error.
In the way that it is implemented now in protocols poses no problem
indeed because the do_xfer loop bails out on error and the xfer is put,
but as soon as some protocol is implemented that violates this common
practice and it just keeps on reuse an xfer after an error fo other
do_xfers() this breaks...so it seemed more defensive to just reinit the
completion and the status before each send.
Thanks,
Cristian
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-07 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-06 22:12 [RFC PATCH 00/10] Introduce SCMI transport atomic support Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Reset properly xfer SCMI status Cristian Marussi
2021-06-07 17:38 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-06-07 18:01 ` Cristian Marussi [this message]
2021-06-07 18:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-06-08 10:10 ` Cristian Marussi
2021-06-08 11:17 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Add missing xfer reinit_completion Cristian Marussi
2021-06-07 17:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-06-07 18:04 ` Cristian Marussi
2021-06-07 18:30 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-06-09 20:51 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Add configurable polling mode for transports Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for atomic transports Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] include: trace: Add new scmi_xfer_response_wait event Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Use new trace event scmi_xfer_response_wait Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] firmware: arm_scmi: Add is_transport_atomic() handle method Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] clk: scmi: Support atomic enable/disable API Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] firmware: arm-scmi: Make smc transport use common completions Cristian Marussi
2021-06-06 22:12 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] firmware: arm-scmi: Make smc transport atomic Cristian Marussi
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=20210607180137.GB40811@e120937-lin \
--to=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com \
--cc=etienne.carriere@linaro.org \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=james.quinlan@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=souvik.chakravarty@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox