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 62C5E7E79F; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 09:08:02 +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=1717405684; cv=none; b=LzaHCRZgrqXfMfQfQE5G4oBSqq7ygvmedboAHXmgHkJJv0tXlAdV9GR8jqWOsS1xuzaeGr+J6rUvLthcAhBBJSGSkWFMyABeDisXHeaFEBSIostLccLYDuKlUGelAkiGBR1e+UeVPfuKEwCDuLWmAyqp7rb6rsx5wtYDz8Ptpxg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717405684; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LYGMtMXJ4+xgoBe7UhVjgwM1rB/tgrzSyhDMb9CnrCg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ix0OOZgAS6xNQXXmflEW6u6flGV3sIoChvO+3bOenvdAW23JUWTW9d3wqacqIT1Q8arey8pjkGm797aVGS5BCFnrUut78NrslgXU5G7lM0g7OVKMKxndSva6RTsbmC7b6nWst7poVcTLFjsKRK4JMGZQ2/iBWDSW5tyvnHB2xWg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=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=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 B29A51042; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 02:08:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bogus (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4761C3F762; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 02:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:07:57 +0100 From: Sudeep Holla To: admiyo@os.amperecomputing.com Cc: Jassi Brar , Sudeep Holla , Robert Moore , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mctp pcc: Check before sending MCTP PCC response ACK Message-ID: References: <20240513173546.679061-1-admiyo@os.amperecomputing.com> <20240528191823.17775-1-admiyo@os.amperecomputing.com> <20240528191823.17775-2-admiyo@os.amperecomputing.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@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: <20240528191823.17775-2-admiyo@os.amperecomputing.com> On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 03:18:21PM -0400, admiyo@os.amperecomputing.com wrote: > From: Adam Young > > Type 4 PCC channels have an option to send back a response > to the platform when they are done processing the request. > The flag to indicate whether or not to respond is inside > the message body, and thus is not available to the pcc > mailbox. Since only one message can be processed at once per > channel, the value of this flag is checked during message processing > and passed back via the channels global structure. > > Ideally, the mailbox callback function would return a value > indicating whether the message requires an ACK, but that > would be a change to the mailbox API. That would involve > some change to all (about 12) of the mailbox based drivers, > and the majority of them would not need to know about the > ACK call. > I don't have all the 3 patches. Is this sent by error or am I expected to just review this patch while other 2 are not mailbox related ? > Signed-off-by: Adam Young > --- > drivers/mailbox/pcc.c | 5 ++++- > include/acpi/pcc.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c b/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c > index 94885e411085..774727b89693 100644 > --- a/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c > @@ -280,6 +280,7 @@ static irqreturn_t pcc_mbox_irq(int irq, void *p) > { > struct pcc_chan_info *pchan; > struct mbox_chan *chan = p; > + struct pcc_mbox_chan *pmchan; > u64 val; > int ret; > > @@ -304,6 +305,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pcc_mbox_irq(int irq, void *p) > if (pcc_chan_reg_read_modify_write(&pchan->plat_irq_ack)) > return IRQ_NONE; > > + pmchan = &pchan->chan; > + pmchan->ack_rx = true; //TODO default to False We need to remove this and detect when it can be true if the default expected is false. -- Regards, Sudeep