From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819A4C432BE for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 05:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5483160FC3 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 05:58:41 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 5483160FC3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=Mt2c/fDVFXEYaXhNyKEXzWKwiTfxVarN2o9sN8mt98E=; b=yS9WvvIT16Tv4f lzkQRE0zS3KPWajWQ7FrVK5RvkcxmwwXj4api/yWYgVhB/Oen9mWwqpyL5/YE5L/0eIKjqqmJ1VhI +i45iDzqWVHG10MLhOn1Ml9CT5U+D+ckEbIvR/uPnwhBYAu7c4hFYjusgAyJJnZDY3VemaziPdRco N6SH/HD7SEH0neeZK9SOb4V7ePMMdZW2ABwXnvV+WXavKeXtKOkWrRBkzmxt7ov033benX5GalATK becqidBeiaOJ3njYl7y3LRSuq1S4U3MKQy6tiZmQvFgS/R70Jr3+HKbLnX/AeSNirDYmbUyKEUSqO 356v01584N4tMmUkkWjA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mKwl8-001NPD-8a; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 05:56:34 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mKwl3-001NOk-My for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 05:56:31 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4427B6D; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 22:56:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e120937-lin (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A88A33F694; Mon, 30 Aug 2021 22:56:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 06:56:22 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Jim Quinlan Cc: Florian Fainelli , open list , "moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" , Sudeep Holla , Jonathan Cameron , etienne.carriere@linaro.org, Vincent Guittot , Souvik Chakravarty Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag Message-ID: <20210831055622.GK13160@e120937-lin> References: <20210824135941.38656-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20210824135941.38656-12-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <7a2f972d-fdd0-d0f7-cac2-1989980ed872@gmail.com> <20210825184915.GI13160@e120937-lin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210830_225629_890221_72A77CF3 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 47.13 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 02:29:21PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 2:49 PM Cristian Marussi > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 01:17:47PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:38 PM Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Florian and Jim, > > > > > > On 8/24/2021 3:59 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > > > > A flag is added to let the transport signal the core that its handling of > > > > > synchronous command messages implies that, after .send_message has returned > > > > > successfully, the requested command can be assumed to be fully and > > > > > completely executed on SCMI platform side so that any possible response > > > > > value is already immediately available to be retrieved by a .fetch_reponse: > > > > > in other words the polling phase can be skipped in such a case and the > > > > > response values accessed straight away. > > > > > > > > > > Note that all of the above applies only when polling mode of operation was > > > > > selected by the core: if instead a completion IRQ was found to be available > > > > > the normal response processing path based on completions will still be > > > > > followed. > > > > > > > > This might actually have to be settable on a per-message basis ideally > > > > since we may be transporting short lived SCMI messages for which the > > > > completion can be done at SMC time, and long lived SCMI messages (e.g.: > > > > involving a voltage change) for which we would prefer a completion > > > > interrupt. Jim, what do you think? > > > Even if the SCMI main driver could be configured this way in an > > > elegant manner, I'm not sure that there is a clean way of specifying > > > this attribute on a per-message basis. Certainly we could do this > > > with our own protocols, but many of our "long lived" messages are the > > > Perf protocol's set_level command. At any rate, let me give it some > > > thought. > > > > > > > The new flag .sync_cmds_atomic_replies applies only when polling mode > > has been selected for a specific cmd transaction, which means when no > > completion IRQ was found available OR if xfer.poll_completion was > > excplicitly set for a specific command. > > > > At the moment in this series (unknown bugs apart :D), if you have a > > channel configured with a completion IRQ and the .sync_cmds_atomic_replies > > set for the transport, this latter flag would be generally ignored and a > > wait_for_completion() will be normally used upon reception of the > > completionIRQ, UNLESS you specify that one specific command has to be > > polled using the per message xfer.poll_completion flag: so you should be > > already able to selectively use a polling which immediately returns after > > the smc by setting xfer.poll_completion for that specific short lived > > message (since sync_cmds_atomic_replies is set and applies to pollmode). > > On the other side any other LONG lived message will be naturally handled > > via completionIRQ + wait_for_completion. (at least that was the aim..) > > > > !!! NOTE that you'll have also to drop > > > > [PATCH v4 10/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc transport atomic > > > > from this series for the wait_completion to happen as you wish. > > Hi Cristian, > Hi Jim, > I've tested all commits on our SMC-based system. I also tested all commits > minus "10/12 [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc transport atomic". > This was a basic stress test, not a comprehensive one. So > > Tested-by: Jim Quinlan > Thanks a lot for this testing. > Of course I have a strong preference for omitting "10/12 [RFC]" :-). > FWIW, if you are not planning on dropping this commit, perhaps there > could be a transport > node in the DT, and that could contain the a bool property > "smc-atomic-capable"? Indeed, as I was saying more than one customer/partner is asking for this configurability so this atomic mode should be definitely configurable. (as it could be teh case similarly with the sync_cmds_atomic_replies depedning on SCMI server placement..) I'll talk with Sudeep in general about the series and this configurations; in fact I can exclude that I'll commit this series with 10/12 as it is right now. Thanks for the feedback ! Cristian > > Regards, > Jim Quinlan > Broadcom STB > > > > > As said I'm not sure that this whole mixing of polling and IRQs on the > > same channel on a regular won't cause any issues: any feedback on this > > from your setup is much appreciated. > > (maybe it's fine for SMC transport, but it led to a bit of hell in the > > past with mboxes AFAIK...) > > > > Thanks a lot again for your feedback, I'll have to chat with Sudeep > > about the various issues/configs possibility that we discussed and I'll > > keep you in the loop. > > > > Thanks, > > Cristian > > > > P.S.: I'll be off for a few weeks, so even though I'll keep an eye on > > the mail, I cannot guarantee any responsiveness :D _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel