From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification dispatch and delivery Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:51:52 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <45d4aee9-57df-6be9-c176-cf0d03940c21@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20200304162558.48836-8-cristian.marussi@arm.com> Hi Cristian, just one comment below... On 3/4/20 4:25 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > Add core SCMI Notifications dispatch and delivery support logic which is > able, at first, to dispatch well-known received events from the RX ISR to > the dedicated deferred worker, and then, from there, to final deliver the > events to the registered users' callbacks. > > Dispatch and delivery is just added here, still not enabled. > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> > --- > V3 --> V4 > - dispatcher now handles dequeuing of events in chunks (header+payload): > handling of these in_flight events let us remove one unneeded memcpy > on RX interrupt path (scmi_notify) > - deferred dispatcher now access their own per-protocol handlers' table > reducing locking contention on the RX path > V2 --> V3 > - exposing wq in sysfs via WQ_SYSFS > V1 --> V2 > - splitted out of V1 patch 04 > - moved from IDR maps to real HashTables to store event_handlers > - simplified delivery logic > --- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c | 334 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.h | 9 + > 2 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c [snip] > + > +/** > + * scmi_notify - Queues a notification for further deferred processing > + * > + * This is called in interrupt context to queue a received event for > + * deferred processing. > + * > + * @handle: The handle identifying the platform instance from which the > + * dispatched event is generated > + * @proto_id: Protocol ID > + * @evt_id: Event ID (msgID) > + * @buf: Event Message Payload (without the header) > + * @len: Event Message Payload size > + * @ts: RX Timestamp in nanoseconds (boottime) > + * > + * Return: 0 on Success > + */ > +int scmi_notify(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u8 proto_id, u8 evt_id, > + const void *buf, size_t len, u64 ts) > +{ > + struct scmi_registered_event *r_evt; > + struct scmi_event_header eh; > + struct scmi_notify_instance *ni = handle->notify_priv; > + > + /* Ensure atomic value is updated */ > + smp_mb__before_atomic(); > + if (unlikely(!atomic_read(&ni->enabled))) > + return 0; > + > + r_evt = SCMI_GET_REVT(ni, proto_id, evt_id); > + if (unlikely(!r_evt)) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + if (unlikely(len > r_evt->evt->max_payld_sz)) { > + pr_err("SCMI Notifications: discard badly sized message\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + if (unlikely(kfifo_avail(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo) < > + sizeof(eh) + len)) { > + pr_warn("SCMI Notifications: queue full dropping proto_id:%d evt_id:%d ts:%lld\n", > + proto_id, evt_id, ts); > + return -ENOMEM; > + } > + > + eh.timestamp = ts; > + eh.evt_id = evt_id; > + eh.payld_sz = len; > + kfifo_in(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo, &eh, sizeof(eh)); > + kfifo_in(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo, buf, len); > + queue_work(r_evt->proto->equeue.wq, > + &r_evt->proto->equeue.notify_work); Is it safe to ignore the return value from the queue_work here? Regards, Lukasz
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification dispatch and delivery Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:51:52 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <45d4aee9-57df-6be9-c176-cf0d03940c21@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20200304162558.48836-8-cristian.marussi@arm.com> Hi Cristian, just one comment below... On 3/4/20 4:25 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote: > Add core SCMI Notifications dispatch and delivery support logic which is > able, at first, to dispatch well-known received events from the RX ISR to > the dedicated deferred worker, and then, from there, to final deliver the > events to the registered users' callbacks. > > Dispatch and delivery is just added here, still not enabled. > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> > --- > V3 --> V4 > - dispatcher now handles dequeuing of events in chunks (header+payload): > handling of these in_flight events let us remove one unneeded memcpy > on RX interrupt path (scmi_notify) > - deferred dispatcher now access their own per-protocol handlers' table > reducing locking contention on the RX path > V2 --> V3 > - exposing wq in sysfs via WQ_SYSFS > V1 --> V2 > - splitted out of V1 patch 04 > - moved from IDR maps to real HashTables to store event_handlers > - simplified delivery logic > --- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c | 334 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.h | 9 + > 2 files changed, 342 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c [snip] > + > +/** > + * scmi_notify - Queues a notification for further deferred processing > + * > + * This is called in interrupt context to queue a received event for > + * deferred processing. > + * > + * @handle: The handle identifying the platform instance from which the > + * dispatched event is generated > + * @proto_id: Protocol ID > + * @evt_id: Event ID (msgID) > + * @buf: Event Message Payload (without the header) > + * @len: Event Message Payload size > + * @ts: RX Timestamp in nanoseconds (boottime) > + * > + * Return: 0 on Success > + */ > +int scmi_notify(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u8 proto_id, u8 evt_id, > + const void *buf, size_t len, u64 ts) > +{ > + struct scmi_registered_event *r_evt; > + struct scmi_event_header eh; > + struct scmi_notify_instance *ni = handle->notify_priv; > + > + /* Ensure atomic value is updated */ > + smp_mb__before_atomic(); > + if (unlikely(!atomic_read(&ni->enabled))) > + return 0; > + > + r_evt = SCMI_GET_REVT(ni, proto_id, evt_id); > + if (unlikely(!r_evt)) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + if (unlikely(len > r_evt->evt->max_payld_sz)) { > + pr_err("SCMI Notifications: discard badly sized message\n"); > + return -EINVAL; > + } > + if (unlikely(kfifo_avail(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo) < > + sizeof(eh) + len)) { > + pr_warn("SCMI Notifications: queue full dropping proto_id:%d evt_id:%d ts:%lld\n", > + proto_id, evt_id, ts); > + return -ENOMEM; > + } > + > + eh.timestamp = ts; > + eh.evt_id = evt_id; > + eh.payld_sz = len; > + kfifo_in(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo, &eh, sizeof(eh)); > + kfifo_in(&r_evt->proto->equeue.kfifo, buf, len); > + queue_work(r_evt->proto->equeue.wq, > + &r_evt->proto->equeue.notify_work); Is it safe to ignore the return value from the queue_work here? Regards, Lukasz _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-12 13:51 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-03-04 16:25 [PATCH v4 00/13] SCMI Notifications Core Support Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 01/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add receive buffer support for notifications Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 02/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Update protocol commands and notification list Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 03/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notifications support in transport layer Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 04/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add support for notifications message processing Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 05/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification protocol-registration Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 11:33 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 11:33 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 12:04 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 12:04 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 06/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification callbacks-registration Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 11:50 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 11:50 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 12:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 12:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 07/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification dispatch and delivery Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 12:26 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 12:26 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 16:37 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 16:37 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-10 10:01 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-10 10:01 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-12 13:51 ` Lukasz Luba [this message] 2020-03-12 13:51 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-12 14:06 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-12 14:06 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-12 19:24 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-12 19:24 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-12 20:57 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-12 20:57 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-12 18:34 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-12 18:34 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-12 21:43 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-12 21:43 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-16 14:46 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-16 14:46 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-18 8:26 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-18 8:26 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-23 8:28 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-23 8:28 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-05-20 7:09 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-05-20 7:09 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-05-20 10:23 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-05-20 10:23 ` Lukasz Luba 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 08/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Enable notification core Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 09/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Power notifications support Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 12:28 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 12:28 ` Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 16:39 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 16:39 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 10/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Perf " Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 11/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Sensor " Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 12/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Reset " Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` [PATCH v4 13/13] firmware: arm_scmi: Add Base " Cristian Marussi 2020-03-04 16:25 ` Cristian Marussi 2020-03-09 12:33 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] SCMI Notifications Core Support Jonathan Cameron 2020-03-09 12:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=45d4aee9-57df-6be9-c176-cf0d03940c21@arm.com \ --to=lukasz.luba@arm.com \ --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com \ --cc=cristian.marussi@arm.com \ --cc=james.quinlan@broadcom.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.