LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@broadcom.com>
To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	etienne.carriere@linaro.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Souvik Chakravarty <souvik.chakravarty@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 13:50:04 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+-6iNxNipXk_JVfn_2W3sVhgPMVj87FKwrTDU4c4AkgD5CSpA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210923150319.GC6510@e120937-lin>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4588 bytes --]

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:03 AM Cristian Marussi
<cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 02:29:21PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 2:49 PM Cristian Marussi
> > <cristian.marussi@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 01:17:47PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:38 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> 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.
> >
> > Hi Cristian,
> >
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> > I've tested all commits on our SMC-based system.  I also tested all commits
> > minus  "10/12 [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Make smc transport atomic".
> > This was a basic stress test, not a comprehensive one.  So
> >
> > Tested-by: Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@broadcom.com>
> >
> > Of course I have a strong preference for omitting  "10/12 [RFC]" :-).
> > FWIW, if you are not planning on dropping this commit, perhaps there
> > could be a transport
> > node in the DT, and that could contain the  a bool  property
> > "smc-atomic-capable"?
> >
>
> I just posted V5 on this SCMI atomic transport series, where the atomic
> mode behaviour of a transport can be selected by a Kconfig which is defined
> as default N: so this new series should behave out-of-the-box like with the
> previous one when you had dropped as a whole the SMC atomic patch.
>
> Any feedback welcome.

Hi Christian,

This is very much appreciated, thanks!    No feedback except

Tested-by: Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@broadcom.com>

Thanks again,
Jim
>
>
> Thanks,
> Cristian
>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4210 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-04 17:50 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
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 [this message]
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:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CA+-6iNxNipXk_JVfn_2W3sVhgPMVj87FKwrTDU4c4AkgD5CSpA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=james.quinlan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
    --cc=etienne.carriere@linaro.org \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=souvik.chakravarty@arm.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] [RFC] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* 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).