All of
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Maulik Shah <>
To: Doug Anderson <>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <>,
	Evan Green <>,
	Bjorn Andersson <>,
	LKML <>,
	linux-arm-msm <>,
	Andy Gross <>,
	Matthias Kaehlcke <>,
	Rajendra Nayak <>,
	Lina Iyer <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 6/6] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Allow using free WAKE TCS for active request
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 14:27:41 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>


On 3/28/2020 12:12 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 5:04 AM Maulik Shah <> wrote:
>>> Why can't rpmh_write()
>>> / rpmh_write_async() / rpmh_write_batch() just always unconditionally
>>> mark the cache dirty?  Are there really lots of cases when those calls
>>> are made and they do nothing?
>> At rpmh.c, it doesn't know that rpmh-rsc.c worked on borrowed TCS to finish the request.
>> We should not blindly mark caches dirty everytime.
> In message ID ""
> which seems to be missing from the archives, you said:
>> yes we should trust callers not to send duplicate data
> can see some reference to it in my reply:
> If callers are trusted to never send duplicate data then ever call to
> rpmh_write() will make a change.  ...and thus the cache should always
> be marked dirty, no?  Also note that since rpmh_write() to "active"
> also counts as a write to "wake" even those will dirty the cache.
> Which case are you expecting a rpmh_write() call to not dirty the cache?
Ok, i will remove marking cache dirty here.
>>> ...interestingly after your patch I guess now I guess tcs_invalidate()
>>> no longer needs spinlocks since it's only ever called from PM code on
>>> the last CPU.  ...if you agree, I can always do it in my cleanup
>>> series.  See:
>>> -Doug
>> There are other RSCs which use same driver, so lets keep spinlock.
> It is really hard to try to write keeping in mind these "other RSCs"
> for which there is no code upstream.  IMO we should write the code
> keeping in mind what is supported upstream and then when those "other
> RSCs" get added we can evaluate their needs.

Agree but i would insist not remove locks in your cleanup/documentation 
series which are already there.

These will be again need to be added.

The locks don't cause any issue being there since only last cpu is 
invoking rpmh_flush() at present.

Adding support for other RSCs is in my to do list, and when that is 
being done we can re-evaluate and

remove if not required.

> Specifically when reasoning about rpmh.c and rpmh-rsc.c I can only
> look at the code that's there now and decide whether it is race free
> or there are races.  Back when I was analyzing the proposal to do
> rpmh_flush() all the time (not from PM code) it felt like there were a
> bunch of races, especially in the zero-active-TCS case.  Most of the
> races go away when you assume that rpmh_flush() is only ever called
> from the PM code when nobody could be in the middle of an active
> transfer.
> If we are ever planning to call rpmh_flush() from another place we
> need to re-look at all those races.
Sure. we can re-look all cases.
> -Doug

QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

      reply	other threads:[~2020-03-31  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-26 17:37 [PATCH v14 0/6] Invoke rpmh_flush for non OSI targets Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 17:37 ` [PATCH v14 1/6] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Add cpuidle low power states Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 17:37 ` [PATCH v14 2/6] soc: qcom: rpmh: Update dirty flag only when data changes Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 17:37 ` [PATCH v14 3/6] soc: qcom: rpmh: Invalidate SLEEP and WAKE TCSes before flushing new data Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 18:31   ` Doug Anderson
2020-03-27  8:23     ` Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 17:37 ` [PATCH v14 4/6] soc: qcom: rpmh: Invoke rpmh_flush() for dirty caches Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 21:18   ` Doug Anderson
     [not found]     ` <>
2020-03-27 18:22       ` Doug Anderson
2020-03-31  8:26         ` Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 17:37 ` [PATCH v14 5/6] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Clear active mode configuration for wake TCS Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 18:20   ` Doug Anderson
2020-03-26 17:37 ` [PATCH v14 6/6] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Allow using free WAKE TCS for active request Maulik Shah
2020-03-26 21:46   ` Doug Anderson
2020-03-27 12:04     ` Maulik Shah
2020-03-27 18:42       ` Doug Anderson
2020-03-31  8:57         ` Maulik Shah [this message]

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 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v14 6/6] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Allow using free WAKE TCS for active request' \

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

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.