From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: "lihuisong (C)" <lihuisong@huawei.com>
Cc: robbiek@xsightlabs.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, wanghuiqiang@huawei.com,
zhangzekun11@huawei.com, wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com,
tanxiaofei@huawei.com, guohanjun@huawei.com, xiexiuqi@huawei.com,
wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, huangdaode@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:02:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230302140216.m4m3452vexyrnuln@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2a165476-2e96-17b1-a50b-c8749462e8a1@huawei.com>
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 10:17:07AM +0800, lihuisong (C) wrote:
>
> 在 2023/3/1 21:36, Sudeep Holla 写道:
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 02:36:53PM +0800, Huisong Li wrote:
> > > If the platform acknowledge interrupt is level triggered, then it can
> > > be shared by multiple subspaces provided each one has a unique platform
> > > interrupt ack preserve and ack set masks.
> > >
> > > If it can be shared, then we can request the irq with IRQF_SHARED and
> > > IRQF_ONESHOT flags. The first one indicating it can be shared and the
> > > latter one to keep the interrupt disabled until the hardirq handler
> > > finished.
> > >
> > > Further, since there is no way to detect if the interrupt is for a given
> > > channel as the interrupt ack preserve and ack set masks are for clearing
> > > the interrupt and not for reading the status(in case Irq Ack register
> > > may be write-only on some platforms), we need a way to identify if the
> > > given channel is in use and expecting the interrupt.
> > >
> > > PCC type0, type1 and type5 do not support shared level triggered interrupt.
> > > The methods of determining whether a given channel for remaining types
> > > should respond to an interrupt are as follows:
> > > - type2: Whether the interrupt belongs to a given channel is only
> > > determined by the status field in Generic Communications Channel
> > > Shared Memory Region, which is done in rx_callback of PCC client.
> > > - type3: This channel checks chan_in_use flag first and then checks the
> > > command complete bit(value '1' indicates that the command has
> > > been completed).
> > > - type4: Platform ensure that the default value of the command complete
> > > bit corresponding to the type4 channel is '1'. This command
> > > complete bit is '0' when receive a platform notification.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/mailbox/pcc.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c b/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c
> > > index ecd54f049de3..04c2d73a0473 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mailbox/pcc.c
> > > @@ -92,6 +92,10 @@ struct pcc_chan_reg {
> > > * @error: PCC register bundle for the error status register
> > > * @plat_irq: platform interrupt
> > > * @type: PCC subspace type
> > > + * @plat_irq_flags: platform interrupt flags
> > > + * @chan_in_use: flag indicating whether the channel is in use or not when use
> > > + * platform interrupt, and only use it for communication from OSPM
> > > + * to Platform, like type 3.
> > Also add a node that since only one transfer can occur at a time and the
> > mailbox takes care of locking, this flag needs no locking and is used just
> > to check if the interrupt needs handling when it is shared.
> Add a per-channel lock. Is this your mean?
No. I meant a comment saying it is not need since only one transfer can occur
at a time and mailbox takes care of locking. So chan_in_use can be accessed
without a lock.
> >
> > > */
> > > struct pcc_chan_info {
> > > struct pcc_mbox_chan chan;
> > > @@ -102,6 +106,8 @@ struct pcc_chan_info {
> > > struct pcc_chan_reg error;
> > > int plat_irq;
> > > u8 type;
> > > + unsigned int plat_irq_flags;
> > > + bool chan_in_use;
> > > };
> > > #define to_pcc_chan_info(c) container_of(c, struct pcc_chan_info, chan)
> > > @@ -225,6 +231,12 @@ static int pcc_map_interrupt(u32 interrupt, u32 flags)
> > > return acpi_register_gsi(NULL, interrupt, trigger, polarity);
> > > }
> > > +static bool pcc_chan_plat_irq_can_be_shared(struct pcc_chan_info *pchan)
> > > +{
> > > + return (pchan->plat_irq_flags & ACPI_PCCT_INTERRUPT_MODE) ==
> > > + ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static bool pcc_chan_command_complete(struct pcc_chan_info *pchan,
> > > u64 cmd_complete_reg_val)
> > > {
> > > @@ -277,6 +289,9 @@ static irqreturn_t pcc_mbox_irq(int irq, void *p)
> > > int ret;
> > > pchan = chan->con_priv;
> > > + if (pchan->type == ACPI_PCCT_TYPE_EXT_PCC_MASTER_SUBSPACE &&
> > > + !pchan->chan_in_use)
> > > + return IRQ_NONE;
> > > ret = pcc_chan_reg_read(&pchan->cmd_complete, &val);
> > > if (ret)
> > > @@ -302,9 +317,13 @@ static irqreturn_t pcc_mbox_irq(int irq, void *p)
> > > /*
> > > * The PCC slave subspace channel needs to set the command complete bit
> > > * and ring doorbell after processing message.
> > > + *
> > > + * The PCC master subspace channel clears chan_in_use to free channel.
> > > */
> > > if (pchan->type == ACPI_PCCT_TYPE_EXT_PCC_SLAVE_SUBSPACE)
> > > pcc_send_data(chan, NULL);
> > > + else if (pchan->type == ACPI_PCCT_TYPE_EXT_PCC_MASTER_SUBSPACE)
> > > + pchan->chan_in_use = false;
> > Just wondering if this has to be for type 3 only. I am trying to avoid
> > conditional update of this flag, can we not do it for everything except type4 ?
> > (I mean just in unconditional else part)
> But type2 do not need this flag.
Yes
> For types no need this flag, it is always hard to understand and redundant
> design.
But does it matter ? You can even support shared interrupt for type 1&2.
They support level interrupt, so we can add them too. I understand you can
test only type 3, but this driver caters for all and the code must be generic
as much as possible. I don't see any point in check for type 3 only. Only
type 4 is slave and operates quite opposite compared to other types and makes
sense to handle it differently.
> If no this condition, we don't know what is the impact on the furture types.
We can add/extend the check if necessary while adding the support for that
in the future.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-02 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 89+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-16 3:40 [RFC] ACPI: PCC: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2022-10-26 6:10 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-10-27 11:10 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-10-27 12:48 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-10-27 15:53 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-10-28 7:55 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-10-31 10:40 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-11-01 2:49 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-11-04 15:04 ` Robbie King
2022-11-04 15:15 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-11-04 15:39 ` Robbie King
2022-11-07 6:24 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-11-17 18:09 ` Robbie King
2022-11-19 7:32 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-11-21 16:59 ` Robbie King
2022-11-22 3:42 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-11-22 3:30 ` [RFC V2] " Huisong Li
2022-11-22 13:46 ` Sudeep Holla
2022-11-23 3:36 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-12-03 9:51 ` [RFC-V3 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt Huisong Li
2022-12-03 9:51 ` [RFC-V3 1/2] mailbox: pcc: Add processing platform notification for slave subspaces Huisong Li
2023-02-06 15:39 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-02-07 2:27 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-02-13 21:18 ` Robbie King
2023-02-14 1:24 ` lihuisong (C)
2022-12-03 9:51 ` [RFC-V3 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2022-12-14 2:57 ` [RFC-V3 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt lihuisong (C)
2022-12-30 1:07 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-01-04 11:06 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-01-05 1:14 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-01-28 1:49 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-02-16 6:36 ` [PATCH " Huisong Li
2023-02-16 6:36 ` [PATCH 1/2] mailbox: pcc: Add processing platform notification for slave subspaces Huisong Li
2023-03-01 13:24 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-02 1:57 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-03-02 13:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-03 1:50 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-03-03 11:07 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-04 9:49 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-02-16 6:36 ` [PATCH 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2023-03-01 13:36 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-02 2:17 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-03-02 14:02 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
[not found] ` <020cc964-9938-7ebe-7514-125cd041bfcb@huawei.com>
2023-03-03 11:14 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-04 9:47 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-03-10 20:14 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-14 1:05 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-02-27 13:09 ` [PATCH 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt lihuisong (C)
2023-03-14 11:11 ` [PATCH v2 " Huisong Li
2023-03-14 11:11 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mailbox: pcc: Add support for platform notification handling Huisong Li
2023-03-27 11:30 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-27 12:25 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-03-27 13:27 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-14 11:11 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2023-03-24 2:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt lihuisong (C)
2023-03-27 11:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-03-27 12:31 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-04-10 1:26 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-04-11 14:47 ` Robbie King
2023-04-14 1:05 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-04-14 13:48 ` Robbie King
2023-04-18 2:21 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-04-21 10:55 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-04-23 3:58 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-04-25 13:22 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-04-23 11:03 ` [PATCH v3 " Huisong Li
2023-04-23 11:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] mailbox: pcc: Add support for platform notification handling Huisong Li
2023-04-23 11:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2023-04-25 14:41 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt Sudeep Holla
2023-05-25 12:25 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-05-04 1:30 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-05-09 9:06 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-06-13 12:57 ` [PATCH v4 " Huisong Li
2023-06-13 12:57 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mailbox: pcc: Add support for platform notification handling Huisong Li
2023-06-13 12:57 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2023-06-14 15:58 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt Sudeep Holla
2023-07-14 6:39 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-07-21 12:31 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-06-15 1:58 ` Hanjun Guo
2023-08-01 6:38 ` [PATCH RESEND " Huisong Li
2023-08-01 6:38 ` [PATCH RESEND v4 1/2] mailbox: pcc: Add support for platform notification handling Huisong Li
2023-08-01 6:38 ` [PATCH RESEND v4 2/2] mailbox: pcc: Support shared interrupt for multiple subspaces Huisong Li
2023-08-01 9:38 ` [PATCH RESEND v4 0/2] mailbox: pcc: Support platform notification for type4 and shared interrupt Sudeep Holla
2023-08-09 11:44 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-08-17 6:50 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-08-26 2:40 ` lihuisong (C)
[not found] ` <AS8P193MB233566815E722D9B3B13B5EECAE2A@AS8P193MB2335.EURP193.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
2023-08-28 1:03 ` lihuisong (C)
2023-08-29 9:55 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-09-21 13:52 ` Sudeep Holla
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=20230302140216.m4m3452vexyrnuln@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=huangdaode@huawei.com \
--cc=lihuisong@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robbiek@xsightlabs.com \
--cc=tanxiaofei@huawei.com \
--cc=wanghuiqiang@huawei.com \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com \
--cc=xiexiuqi@huawei.com \
--cc=zhangzekun11@huawei.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: 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).