Re: [PATCH v20 2/4] mailbox: mediatek: Add Mediatek CMDQ driver

Horng-Shyang Liao
2017-02-23T12:48:24Z

On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 09:40 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Horng-Shyang Liao <hs.liao-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-02-16 at 21:02 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Horng-Shyang Liao <hs.liao-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >> > Hi Jassi,
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 10:52 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Horng-Shyang Liao <hs.liao-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >> >> > Hi Jassi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 10:08 +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 8:36 AM, HS Liao <hs.liao-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
> >> >> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> >> >> > index 0000000..747bcd3
> >> >> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> >> >> > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/mtk-cmdq-mailbox.c
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > +static void cmdq_task_exec(struct cmdq_pkt *pkt, struct cmdq_thread *thread)
> >> >> >> > +{
> >> >> >> > + struct cmdq *cmdq;
> >> >> >> > + struct cmdq_task *task;
> >> >> >> > + unsigned long curr_pa, end_pa;
> >> >> >> > +
> >> >> >> > + cmdq = dev_get_drvdata(thread->chan->mbox->dev);
> >> >> >> > +
> >> >> >> > + /* Client should not flush new tasks if suspended. */
> >> >> >> > + WARN_ON(cmdq->suspended);
> >> >> >> > +
> >> >> >> > + task = kzalloc(sizeof(*task), GFP_ATOMIC);
> >> >> >> > + task->cmdq = cmdq;
> >> >> >> > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&task->list_entry);
> >> >> >> > + task->pa_base = dma_map_single(cmdq->mbox.dev, pkt->va_base,
> >> >> >> > + pkt->cmd_buf_size, DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> You seem to parse the requests and responses, that should ideally be
> >> >> >> done in client driver.
> >> >> >> Also, we are here in atomic context, can you move it in client driver
> >> >> >> (before the spin_lock)?
> >> >> >> Maybe by adding a new 'pa_base' member as well in 'cmdq_pkt'.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > will do
> >> >
> >> > I agree with moving dma_map_single out from spin_lock.
> >> >
> >> > However, mailbox clients cannot map virtual memory to mailbox
> >> > controller's device for DMA.
> >> >
> >> If DMA is a resource used by MBox to transfer data, then yes the
> >> mapping needs to be done in the Mbox controller driver. To map memory
> >> outside of spinlock, you could schedule a tasklet in send_data() ?
> >
> > Hi Jassi,
> >
> > For CMDQ, the order of CMDQ tasks should be guaranteed.
> > However, it seems tasklet cannot ensure this requirement.
> >
> > Quote from Linux Device Drivers 3rd edition ch7.
> > "void tasklet_schedule(struct tasklet_struct *t);
> > Schedule the tasklet for execution. If a tasklet is scheduled again
> > before it has a chance to run, it runs only once...."
> >
> Not sure what bothers you.
> If you only add requests to a list, protected by some spinlock, during
> send_datam you could always iterate over (submit) requests in the
> order you queued them.

Hi Jassi,

OK. I will do it.

Thanks,
HS