From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF18C2EBDE9; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 15:58:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768233495; cv=none; b=Dvi4IorpFfC/Lo7vKwS6/nOrmp67f/SWLQciKIHsgEwHmWmPiIQV+lSH3TrgUOQJoe9LFlJyQQ/yqJYB7Trk35i2Q4OE0XrKGvDsbDVfELXzdcu/fN16Vuepm/SaQqhHV8pdXS2Hor/bMtdXs8bvts6Q5rcYBarJTOIpCmqqlH8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768233495; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Sdkr7qzjfqQlrYTa6bjjkQkt48PZQzLtQga9jTEPSQU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=r133oAHMD7QztE0t9OIPo2mK8X2JRHIxHWl2t12bZouw0cCyZf7mldSMfsKpuddaKuRrz59uJiEwrm0cwvmYC4hDYEdjllXWW+pZP67WnoZeKVjlvjR/MuEEcU/0Jhzp2MUTvfps1mNvTLR+VFNjDWzcJlaGx9Cijx3euKsRt7c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=foss.arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=foss.arm.com 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 51B16497; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 07:58:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (e133711.arm.com [10.1.197.51]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B15533F59E; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 07:58:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 15:58:09 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Cristian Marussi Cc: Marek Vasut , arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , Conor Dooley , Florian Fainelli , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Rob Herring , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Implement arm,poll-transport property Message-ID: References: <20251231213016.185575-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org> <20251231213016.185575-2-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:53:54PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:06:11PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 10:29:19PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > Implement new property arm,poll-transport, which sets all SCMI operation into > > > poll mode. This is meant to work around uncooperative SCP implementations, > > > which do not generate completion interrupts. This applies to mbox/shmem based > > > implementations. > > > > > > With this property set, such implementations which do not generate interrupts > > > can be interacted with, until they are fixed to generate interrupts properly. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > > --- > > > Cc: Conor Dooley > > > Cc: Cristian Marussi > > > Cc: Florian Fainelli > > > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > Cc: Rob Herring > > > Cc: Sudeep Holla > > > Cc: arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > > Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org > > > --- > > > V2: Drop no IRQ handling from SMC transport and update commit message > > > --- > > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 4 ++++ > > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 4 ++++ > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > > index 7c35c95fddbaf..7c9617d080a02 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > > > @@ -235,6 +235,9 @@ struct scmi_transport_ops { > > > * to have an execution latency lesser-equal to the threshold > > > * should be considered for atomic mode operation: such > > > * decision is finally left up to the SCMI drivers. > > > + * @no_completion_irq: Flag to indicate that this transport has no completion > > > + * interrupt and has to be polled. This is similar to the > > > + * force_polling below, except this is set via DT property. > > > * @force_polling: Flag to force this whole transport to use SCMI core polling > > > * mechanism instead of completion interrupts even if available. > > > * @sync_cmds_completed_on_ret: Flag to indicate that the transport assures > > > @@ -254,6 +257,7 @@ struct scmi_desc { > > > int max_msg; > > > int max_msg_size; > > > unsigned int atomic_threshold; > > > + bool no_completion_irq; > > > const bool force_polling; > > > > My preference would be to reuse `force_polling` for this. We need to drop > > const but that should be OK. Anyways I would like to know if Cristian thinks > > otherwise for any reasons I might be missing to see. > > I would rather keep the 2 things separate since force_polling is more of > a brutal low level debug/test facility and, even though it basically > produces the same result as the new @no_completion_irq, if we remove it > and unify it in a single boolean that can be overriden from the DT we end > up in a situation in which we cannot anymore easily force_polling by > switching the flag in the code since it could be overridden by a > conflicting 'arm,poll-transport' DT setup. (and you have to patch DT > for testing) > > So if we have one single underlying boolean (e.g. 'poll') and by any chance > we end up with a DT containing: > > arm,poll-transport = false > > we cannot anymore override the condition by forcing in the code > > poll = true, > > since it would be switfly overridden by the DT prop. > > Also semantically force_polling express much more the situation. > > Anyway...I may be overthinking or missing something. > Understood, looking at raw I did get a sense of this but didn't spend much time and thought of asking you. So, all good. Let's not mix them together then. Thanks for the details! -- Regards, Sudeep