Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:38:24 +0100 | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] firmware: add support for ARM System Control and Power Interface(SCPI) protocol |
| |
On 29/07/15 09:05, Jassi Brar wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > > ... > >> +static int scpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +{ >> + int count, idx, ret; >> + struct resource res; >> + struct scpi_chan *scpi_chan; >> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node; >> + >> + scpi_info = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*scpi_info), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!scpi_info) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + count = of_count_phandle_with_args(np, "mboxes", "#mbox-cells"); >> + if (count < 0) { >> + dev_err(dev, "no mboxes property in '%s'\n", np->full_name); >> + return -ENODEV; >> + } >> + >> + scpi_chan = devm_kcalloc(dev, count, sizeof(*scpi_chan), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!scpi_chan) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + for (idx = 0; idx < count; idx++) { >> + resource_size_t size; >> + struct scpi_chan *pchan = scpi_chan + idx; >> + struct mbox_client *cl = &pchan->cl; >> + struct device_node *shmem = of_parse_phandle(np, "shmem", idx); >> + >> + if (of_address_to_resource(shmem, 0, &res)) { >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get SCPI payload mem resource\n"); >> + ret = -EINVAL; >> + goto err; >> + } >> + >> + size = resource_size(&res); >> + pchan->rx_payload = devm_ioremap(dev, res.start, size); >> + if (!pchan->rx_payload) { >> + dev_err(dev, "failed to ioremap SCPI payload\n"); >> + ret = -EADDRNOTAVAIL; >> + goto err; >> + } >> + pchan->tx_payload = pchan->rx_payload + (size >> 1); >> + >> + cl->dev = dev; >> + cl->rx_callback = scpi_handle_remote_msg; >> + cl->tx_prepare = scpi_tx_prepare; >> + cl->tx_block = true; >> + cl->tx_tout = 50; >> + cl->knows_txdone = false; /* controller can ack */ >> > This is the cause of your problems that you think should be solved by > using hrtimer. >
Ah sorry, it's stupid mistake on my part while writing the comment. It should have been controller can't ack, fixed locally now thanks for pointing it out.
> Controller may or may not (like MHU) set txdone_irq. However every > scpi command (struct scpi_ops members) is replied to as a response > packet reporting success or failure.
No that's not true, I have already mentioned that couple of times in the other thread. It's just wrong comment here which went unnoticed from day#1, sorry for that.
> So the client should set 'knows_txdone' to be true unless it is told > the controller on that platform supports txdone_irq (what you call > 'ack'). >
I got the concept but SCP can't ack via protocol, protocol has no such provision and it sets flags in MHU status register.
Regards, Sudeep
| |