LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cristian Marussi <>
To: Jim Quinlan <>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <>,
	open list <>,
	"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
	Sudeep Holla <>,
	Jonathan Cameron <>,,
	Vincent Guittot <>,
	Souvik Chakravarty <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 19:49:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210825184915.GI13160@e120937-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

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.

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.


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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-25 18:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-24 13:59 [PATCH v4 0/12] Introduce atomic support for SCMI transports Cristian Marussi
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 01/12] firmware: arm_scmi: Perform earlier cinfo lookup call in do_xfer Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:28   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 02/12] firmware: arm_scmi: Add configurable polling mode for transports Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:29   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 03/12] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for atomic transports Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:18   ` Jim Quinlan
2021-08-25 17:50     ` Cristian Marussi
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 04/12] include: trace: Add new scmi_xfer_response_wait event Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:30   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 05/12] firmware: arm_scmi: Use new trace event scmi_xfer_response_wait Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:31   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-25 17:52     ` Cristian Marussi
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 06/12] firmware: arm_scmi: Add is_transport_atomic() handle method Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:32   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 07/12] clk: scmi: Support atomic enable/disable API Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:33   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 08/12] firmware: arm_scmi: Declare virtio transport .atomic_capable Cristian Marussi
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 09/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc transport use common completions Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:35   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 10/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc transport atomic Cristian Marussi
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag Cristian Marussi
2021-08-25 16:38   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-08-25 17:17     ` Jim Quinlan
2021-08-25 18:49       ` Cristian Marussi [this message]
2021-08-26 18:29         ` Jim Quinlan
2021-08-31  5:56           ` Cristian Marussi
2021-09-23 15:03           ` Cristian Marussi
2021-10-04 17:50             ` Jim Quinlan
2021-10-04 18:00               ` Cristian Marussi
2021-08-24 13:59 ` [PATCH v4 12/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc support atomic commands replies Cristian Marussi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210825184915.GI13160@e120937-lin \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).