From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
To: Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@broadcom.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: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:03:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210923150319.GC6510@e120937-lin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+-6iNwjQ1SogxdyrjwqEwLosscUyvrioqFKmesifM_nmCpJAw@mail.gmail.com>
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.
Thanks,
Cristian
_______________________________________________
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:[~2021-09-23 15:07 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 [this message]
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:
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=20210923150319.GC6510@e120937-lin \
--to=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=etienne.carriere@linaro.org \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=james.quinlan@broadcom.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 \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).