Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:54:37 +0000 | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 08/16] firmware: arm_scmi: Add sync_cmds_atomic_replies transport flag |
| |
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 07:11:48PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > Add a flag to let the transport signal to the core if its handling of sync > command 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_response: 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. > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com> > --- > v5 --> v6 > - added polling_capable helper flag > v4 --> v5 > - removed RFC tag > - consider sync_cmds_atomic_replies flag when deciding if polling is to be > supported and .poll_done() is not provided. > - reviewed commit message > --- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h | 8 ++++++ > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- > 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > index 99b74f4d39b6..bf25f0e89c78 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h > @@ -412,6 +412,13 @@ struct scmi_device *scmi_child_dev_find(struct device *parent, > * @max_msg_size: Maximum size of data per message that can be handled. > * @force_polling: Flag to force this whole transport to use SCMI core polling > * mechanism instead of completion interrupts even if available. > + * @sync_cmds_atomic_replies: Flag to indicate that the transport assures > + * synchronous-command messages are atomically > + * completed on .send_message: no need to poll > + * actively waiting for a response.
Not sure if atomic is right term to use. It is atomic w.r.t OSPM though. Can we just say sync_cmd_complete_on_ret or something similar.
-- Regards, Sudeep
| |