From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 6B256364924; Mon, 2 Mar 2026 12:28:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772454524; cv=none; b=upH3AUxNt7w4HlHQaDSHki79OcjwNc+fnnwMR1yqekhdCIhiezdd2NYHw4ZI8/Nf1fiNWLsOigTtvfhPnSl4s0gf9tu75rFpzmK6h/lOSxMIGtOLxnxbUFke/Z86Uh4fyb3t+XSBJeIbtGJpGWkY7uYn2XfvNTpX/R7Ehjy9NS4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772454524; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pppJWZhqbO+BUwuoj7YQnasfi5j/ybVZ9hiQDJe1kZE=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=E38je1ThNEyM1Bs+nKUDcsOn4B2aCDcowhA2aQkWo80wlFbCXWKL5DL3TSTRecHq/PHbrXfgv3icSdzfU2oVSdPWjCv7yrTwv3HaQftjDgaL8dkh4a1k3tGY+GUn8NN9rTq8lYwhVgdZECQpwNvsx1BfgiF03dS15NQFNOW6x1M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WZZjyldL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WZZjyldL" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C26D6C19423; Mon, 2 Mar 2026 12:28:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1772454524; bh=pppJWZhqbO+BUwuoj7YQnasfi5j/ybVZ9hiQDJe1kZE=; h=Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=WZZjyldLowkrRJk4nqZ8neKZ1gp3bXcL7erh2Trk5534OmoeUIICBCuLg2YNg4JMg O/JFkFD8lE0VCnjgNx59+mZlikEllYv3TNK183PropYzKXpcH9NSEPlgf/dnrLdZgj R84fdRrB7C91/cWCFj1eqpdZsgXWQ//uUopW2Xt/3j1mK9o0gs/OMZv7FbuU9xbvkR WGovIrGBeadpBHmE43iHYE2n0H5fSgt1ukaslvmVcgnO0ByBZSMvue2bp7DPFtZwEp ZqsoGxcEJyM+r8lqOJ4TchyvCtF78uqEmeypt5+8VpvUtNjTEW3bh0zm84m/avzoh9 hKPeVibgn942Q== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:28:40 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] gpu: nova-core: gsp: add sync and async command queue API to `Cmdq` Cc: "Eliot Courtney" , "Alice Ryhl" , "Alexandre Courbot" , "David Airlie" , "Simona Vetter" , "Benno Lossin" , "Gary Guo" , , , , To: "John Hubbard" From: "Danilo Krummrich" References: <20260226-cmdq-locking-v2-0-c7e16a6d5885@nvidia.com> <20260226-cmdq-locking-v2-2-c7e16a6d5885@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: On Sat Feb 28, 2026 at 7:11 AM CET, John Hubbard wrote: > The sync/async naming that GSP RM uses is a little bit "off". I > spent some time discussing it with them, and the problem is that > sync/async is a concept that is somewhat independent of whether > a reply is expected. Usually, sync means a blocking wait for a > response, which is not necessarily required in all case with > GSP RM calls. > > The naming would be better here if it reflected simply that > a response is expected, or not. I don't have great names for > that, but "fire and forget" works well for what we have so > far called "async". So we could do create a convention in which > no annotation means that the API has a response that will come > back, and some abbreviated for of "fire and forget" or "one way" > added to the function name would mean that no response is > expected. I think the relevant information for the caller is whether the call is bloc= king or non-blocking; i.e. do we have cases where we want to block, but discard = the reply, or expect a reply but don't want to wait for it? So, unless there is additional complexity I'm not aware of, I feel like send_command() and send_command_no_wait() should be sufficient. (Maybe send_command_wait() if we want to be a bit more explicit.) As for the specific commands, we could have traits to control whether block= ing or non-blocking submissions are allowed for them in the first place, i.e. t= his gives us some control about whether a reply is allowed to be discarded thro= ugh a _no_wait() submission etc.